Origen was born into a Christian home in Alexandria in about 185 AD. His father, Leonidas, was martyred in 202 under the persecution of Septimius Severus. According to the story, Origen’s own early martyrdom was possibly prevented when his mother hid his clothing, thus preventing him from leaving the house. Whether true or not, it does illustrate the zeal that Origen would always have for the Christian faith.
Origen began to support himself by teaching literature and philosophy. As a result of the persecution, Alexandria lacked sufficient leaders to train candidates for baptism. Two brothers, Plutarch and Heraclas, asked Origen to take up this task. Demetrius, Bishop of Alexandria, made it official.
During all this time, Origen remained a layman, since ordination was not required to teach. However, in about 216, he went to Palestine where some of the bishops asked him to preach in their churches. Origen agreed to this, but, when Demetrius found out about this, he ordered Origen to return to Alexandria. Years later, Origen was traveling to Antioch and passed through Palestine. Once again, the bishops asked him to preach; this time, though, they took the precaution of ordaining him. Far from solving the problem, this only created a larger one. Demetrius was incensed. He interpreted this move as an evasion of his authority.
Demetrius did not believe that Origen was qualified for ordination. He certainly had the qualifying skills for office; however, Origen’s overzealous and all too literal application of the passage in Matthew 19:12 concerning those who have “made themselves eunuchs because of the kingdom of heaven,” in Demetrius’ eyes, barred him from this privilege. With the consent of two synods that Demetrius had called in Alexandria, Origen was excommunicated and defrocked. While Demetrius and the synods of Alexandria may have had some legitimate concerns, it is quite likely that Demetrius was influenced by personal motives; namely, envy of Origen’s abilities and popularity. In any event his actions, along with those of the synods, seem to have gone too far. These were not a mere reprimand of Origen, but, implicitly, of the church in Palestine.
When Heraclas, the same who had first asked Origen to teach, having become the Bishop of Alexandria did not overturn the actions of Demetrius, Origen was resigned never to return to his home town. Except for frequent trips throughout the Empire, he spent the remainder of his life in Caesaria in Palestine. There, he spent his time teaching and writing in a school that he had founded. This lasted until the Decian persecution when Origen was taken prisoner and tortured in an attempt to make him renounce his faith. The circumstances of his death are debated. He was either martyred or he died in the city of Tyre due to weakness from his recent imprisonment.
Origen was, perhaps, the most prolific writer of the ancient church. Few of these works survive. Around eight hundred works are known at least by title, but Epiphanius claims that total number was closer to six thousand. Among Origen’s major works were the Hexapla, Contra Celsum, and De principiis.
The Hexapla stands as an early example of conservative textual criticism. Its purpose was to expound the Masoretic text of the Old Testament. This Hebrew text formed the first of six columns. The second column consisted of a Greek transliteration of this text. This was followed by four Greek translations. Three were by individuals: Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotus. The fifth column was reserved for the Septuagint, which Origen carefully annotated to indicated differences with the Masoretic text. If they were available, Origen would also include other translations. Consequently, some passages, especially those within the Psalms, were expanded to as many as nine columns.
Contra Celsum is, as the title suggests, an apologetical work against Celsus. Celsus, a pagan philosopher had written a work against Christianity entitled The True Word. It appears to have been of little consequence and Origen would have been content just to ignore it. Nevertheless, at the request of his friend Ambrose, Origen decided to write a point by point refutation.
De principii, which means, “On First Principles,” was a relatively early work. Justo L. Gonzalez admits to using this work to outline his exposition of Origen’s theology. He discloses the fact that most of this work has survived only in the Latin translation of Rufinus, who also took it upon himself to correct the text. This may present more of a problem than Gonzalez is prepared to admit. There is virtually unanimous agreement among modern scholars that Origen was heavily influenced by Platonist philosophy. While Rufinus should not be blamed for inserting these ideas into Origen’s work, his proclivity for editing has not made any easier the task of figuring out what Origen actually did believe.
Recently, the idea of Origen’s platonic influence has been questioned. While it is much too large a task to investigate these claims for myself, I would like to express tentative agreement based on a narrowly focused but representative example of Origen’s work. I have in mind his two surviving homilies on the Song of Solomon (Song of Songs).
Origen was a member of the Alexandrine school of theology. Supposedly, this school was given over to an allegorical approach to scriptural interpretation. This approach has been characterized by being overly symbolic and ahistorical. Combine this misconception with the idea that Origen was attempting to synthesize theology with Platonist philosophy and Origen’s work becomes a prime target for misinterpretation. Perhaps this oversimplifies the matter; however, I have noted similar critiques of Biblical Theological exegesis of the scriptures: it is allegorical and platonic. Knowing that this critique is unjustified now, I am compelled not to accept immediately these assumptions when reading Origen’s homilies on the Song of Songs.
His exegesis does have problems. Most notable to me is his idea that certain words always mean the same thing throughout scripture. By not allowing for a more localized context for meaning, some of his interpretations seem forced. Less problematic are some possible mistranslations of words. But, despite all of this, his interpretation is governed, not by the idea that the literal and historical do not matter, but by the idea that all of scripture is about Christ. In this, he is in agreement, not only with how Christ and the Apostles interpret the Old Testament, but also with a fundamental principle of Biblical Theological interpretation. Any given text is about Christ. The question is, “How?” While I may disagree on some of his particulars, I must admire Origen, both for his commitment to understanding the very words of scripture and for his insistence upon seeing Christ in all of scripture.
Posted by kcourter at agosto 2, 2004 1:10 AM