RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Origen
book of the large commentary on the same, the twentieth book of the commentary on Ezekiel, and the commentary on Hosea, and of the commentary on John, only books i., ii., x., xiii., xx., xxviii., xxxii., and a fragment of xix. have been preserved. The commentary on Romans is extant only in the abbreviated version of Rufinus, and the eight books preserved of the commentary on Matthew likewise seem to be either a brief reworking or a rough outline. Codex Vaticanus, 1215, gives the division of the twenty-five books of the commentary on Ezekiel, and part of the arrangement of the commentary on Isaiah (beginnings of books VI., VIII., XVI.; book X. extends from Isa. viii. 1 to ix. 7; XL from ix. 8, to x. 11; XII., from x. 12 to x. 23; XIII. from x. 24 to xi. 9; XIV- from xi. 10 to xii. 6;' XV. from xiii. 1 to xiii. 16; XXI. from xix. 1 to xix. 17; XXII. from xix. 18 to xx. 6; XXIII. from xxi. 1 to xxi. 17; XXIV from xxii. 1 to xxii. 25; XXV from xxiii. 1 to xxiii. 18; XXVI. from xxiv. 1 to xxv. 12; XXVII. from xxvi. 1 to xxvi. 15; XXVIII. from xxvi. 16 to xxvii. 11a; XXIX. from xxvii. lib to xxviii. 29; and XXX. treats of xxix. 1 sqq.). The Codex Athous Laura, 184, in like manner, gives the division of the fifteen books of the commentary on Romans (except XI. and XII.) and of the five books on Galatians, as well as the extent of the commentaries on Philippians and Corinthians (Romans: I. from i. 1 to i. 7; II. from i. 8 to i. 25; III. from i. 26 to ii. 11; IV. from ii. 12 to hi. 15; V- from iii. 16 to hi. 31; VI. from iv. 1 to v. 7; VII. from v. 8 to v. 16; VIII. from v. 17 to vi. 15; IX. from vi. 16 to viii. 8; X. from viii. 9 to viii. 39; XIII. from xi. 13 to xii. 15; XIV from xii. 16 to xiv. 10; XV. from xiv. 11 to the end; Galatians: I. from i. 1 to ii. 2; II. from ii. 3 to iii. 4; III. from iii. 5 to iv. 5; IV. from iv. 6 to v. 5; and V from v. 6 to vi. 18; the commentary on Philippians extended to iv. 1; and on Ephesians to iv. 13).
Among the systematic, practical, and apologetic
writings of Origen, mention should first be made of
his work " On First Principles," perhaps written
for his more advanced pupils at Alex-
3. Dog- andria and probably composed be-
matic, tween 212 and 215. It is extant only
Practical, in the free translation of Rufinus, exand cept for fragments of the third and
Apologetic fourth books preserved in the Philo-
Writings. calia, and smaller citations in Justinian's letter to Mennas. In the first book the author considers God, the Logos, the Holy Ghost, reason, and the angels; in the second the world and man (including the incarnation of the Logos, the soul, free will, and eschatology) ; in the third, the doctrine of sin and redemption; and in the fourth, the Scriptures; the whole being concluded with a resume" of the entire system. The work is noteworthy as the first endeavor to present Christianity as a complete theory of the universe, and was designed to remove the difficulties felt by many Christians concerning the essential bases of their faith. Earlier in date than this treatise were the two books on the resurrection (now lost, a fate which has also befallen two dialogues on the same theme) dedicated to Ambrose. After his removal |
to Cajsarea, Origen wrote the works, still extant, " On Prayer," " On Martyrdom," and " Against Celsus." The first of these was written shortly before 235 (or possibly before 230), and, after an introduction on the object, necessity, and advantage of prayer, ends with an exegesis of the Lord's Prayer, concluding with remarks on the position, place, and attitude to be assumed during prayer, as well as on the classes of prayer. The persecution of Maximinus was the occasion of the composition of the " On Martyrdom," which is preserved in the " Exhortation to Martyrdom." In it, Origen warns against any trifling with idolatry and emphasizes the duty of suffering martyrdom manfully; while in the second part he explains the meaning of martyrdom. The eight books against Celsus (q.v.) were written in 248 in reply to the polemic of that pagan philosopher against Christianity. Eusebius had a collection of more than one hundred letters of Origen (Hist, eccl., VI., xxxvi. 3; Eng. transl. NPNF, 2 ser. i. 278-279), and the list of Jerome speaks of several books of his epistles. Except for a few fragments, only a short letter to Gregory Thaumaturgus and the epistle to Julius Africanus (defending the authenticity of the Greek additions to Daniel) have been preserved. For forgeries of the writings of Origen made in his lifetime cf. Rufinus, De adulteratione librorum Origenis. The Dialogus de recta in Deum fide (q.v.), the Philosophumena of Hippolytus (q.v.), and the Commentary on Job by Julian of Haliearnassus (q.v.) have also been ascribed to him.
III. Views: Origen, trained in the school of Clement and by his father, was essentially a Platonist with occasional traces of Stoic philosophy.
He was thus a pronounced idealist,
1. Philo- regarding all things temporal and ma-
sophical and terial as insignificant and indifferent,
Religious, the only real and eternal things being
comprised in the idea. He therefore regards as the purely ideal center of this spiritual and eternal world, God, the pure reason, whose creative powers call into being the w7orld with matter as the necessary substratum. Likewise Platonic is the doctrine that those spirits capable of knowing supreme reason, but imprisoned in the body in this wrorld, will rise after death to divinity, being purified by fire. In his attempt to amalgamate the system evolved by Greek thought with Christianity, Origen found his predecessors in the Platonizing Philo and even in the Gnostics. His exegesis does not differ generally from that of Heracleon, but in the canon of the New Testament and in the tradition of the Church, Origen possessed a check which kept him from the excesses of Gnostic exegesis. He was, indeed, a rigid adherent of the Bible, making no statement without adducing some Scriptural basis. To him the Bible was divinely inspired, as was proved both by the fulfilment of prophecy and by the immediate impression which the Scriptures made on him who read them. Since the divine Logos spoke in the Scriptures, they were an organic whole and on every occasion he combatted the Gnostic tenet of the inferiority of the Old Testament. He was aware of the discrepancies between the Old and New Testaments and the contradictory
Origen