Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T18:21:01.517Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Charismatic Intellectual: Origen's Understanding of Religious Leadership

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Joseph W. Trigg
Joseph W. Trigg
Affiliation:
The Institute for Advanced Studies in Rice University, Houston, Texas.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Origen's vocabulary is quite definitely that of an intellectual; it owes little to daily life or to the vernacular of his time.… He seems …to manufacture his own language, often hermetic, abstract, or difficult to understand, the language of a man concerned above all with ideas, somewhat cut off from the real world, and constitutionally separated from concrete realities. Are we wrong in attaching a particular significance to the fact, so characteristic of his passionate idealism as well as of his introversion, that he made himself a eunuch ?

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , March 1981 , pp. 5 - 19
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Harl, Marguerite, Origène et la fonction révélatrice du Verbe incarné (Paris, 1958), p. 366.Google Scholar All translations are my own unless otherwise noted.

2. Nautin, Pierre, Origène: sa vie et son oeuvre (Paris, 1977).Google Scholar See also his Lettres et écrivains chrétiens des IIe et IIIe siècles (Paris, 1961).Google Scholar

3. Nautin, , Oriène, p. 414.Google Scholar

4. Ibid., p. 48 on Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6.3.3–8. Koch, Hal, “Origenes,” in Paulys Realencyclopädie der classische Altertumswissenschaft, q. v., 1939),Google ScholarHornschuh, Manfred, “Das Leben des Origenes und die Entstehung der alexandrinischen Schule,” Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 71 (1960): 1–25, 193–214,Google Scholar and Kettler, F. H., “Origenes,” in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 3rd. ed., 1960, deny more forthrightly than Nautin that Origen was a catechist.Google Scholar

5. See Jerome, , Epistle 84. 10.Google Scholar

6. Nautin, , Origène, p. 418.Google Scholar

7. Ibid., p. 316. I can see no plausibility in Hornschuh's contention (“Das Leben des Origenes,” pp. 1–2) that Caracalla's measures endangered Origen in his capacity as a philosopher.

8. Ibid., p. 428.

9. Ibid., p. 22, and Nautin, , Lettres, pp. 133–134.Google Scholar

10. Nautin, , Origène, pp. 401–405.Google Scholar

11. Ibid., pp. 437–438.

12. Ibid., p. 439.

13. See Harnack, Adolf, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity, trans. Moffatt, James, 2 vols. (New York, 1908), 1: 463Google Scholar and Bauer, Walter, Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity, trans. Kraft, Robert et al. (Philadelphia, 1971), pp. 53–54.Google ScholarRoberts's, Colin H. Manuscript, Society and Belief in Early Christian Egypt (London, 1977), p. 71,Google Scholar confirms the picture I have presented: “We may surmise that for much of the second century it [the church in Egypt] was a church with no strong central authority and little organization; one of the directions in which it developed was certainly Gnosticism, but a Gnosticism not initially separated from the rest of the Church.”

14. Sohm, Rudolph, Kirchenrecht, vol. 1 (Leipzig, 1892).Google Scholar See Weber, Max, On Charisma and Institution Building, ed. Eisenstadt, S. N. (Chicago, 1968), p. 46,Google Scholar and Brockhaus, Ulrich, Charisma und Amt (Wuppertal, 1972).Google Scholar

15. Sohm, , Kirchenrecht, pp. 29–35 and 58–59,Google Scholar and Galatians 1:1.

16. Sohm, , Kirchenrecht, pp. 27–28 and 56,Google Scholar and Philemon 8.

17. Sohm, , Kirchenrecht, pp. 51–52Google Scholar and 1 Corinthians 9:2 (also 2 Corinthians 3:2, Philippians 4:1, and 1 Thessalonians 2:19).

18. Sohm, , Kirchenrecht, p. 29;Google Scholar 2 Corinthians 4:13; and 1 Corinthians 7:30.

19. Sohm, , Kirchenrecht, pp. 116–118.Google Scholar See Käsemann, Ernst, Perspectives on Paul (Philadelphia, 1971)Google Scholar and Schutz, J. H., Paul and the Anatomy of Apostolic Authority (London, 1975)Google Scholar for a detailed discussion of charisma in Paul.

20. See Holl, Karl, Enthusiasmus und Bussgewalt beim griechischen Mönchtum: eine Studie zu Simeon dem Neuen Theologen (Leipzig, 1898)Google Scholar and Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Kirchengeschichte II, der Osten(Tubingen, 1928), pp. 44–67.Google Scholar Walter Volker amplifies Holl's views in Das Vollkommenheitsideal des Origenes: eine Untersuchung zur Geschichte der Frömmigkeit und zu den Anfängen christlicher Mystik (Tubingen, 1930) pp. 168–192.Google Scholar

21. In Gregg, J.A.F., “Origen's Commentary on Ephesians,” Journal of Theological Studies 3 (1902): 413–414.Google Scholar

22. Origen, , Commentary on John 1. 2Google Scholar (4.5.16–6. 6). In citing Clement and Origen, I give conventional book and chapter numbers followed, in parentheses, by the volume, page and line in the Griechische christlische Schriftsteller edition. See also Homilies on Joshua 9.5 (7.350.27–351.5), where Origen states that the real priest is not just a person who has an outward eminence in the church but one who acts in a priestly manner. These “priests” are presumably those who “abandon themselves to the study of rational argument” so as not to have to accept their faith on authority; Origen, , Contra Celsum 1.11Google Scholar (1.62.25–26).

23. See Clement, , Stromateis 4.25.Google Scholar157.3–159.3 (2.318.7–319.4), 5.6.32.1–40.1 (2.346.27–354.4) and 7.7.36.2 (3.28.8) and Excerpts from Theodotus 27 (3.115.22–116.17). In Clément d'Alexandrie: Extraits de Théodote (Paris, 1970), 2nd. ed., pp. 220–223),Google Scholar Francois Sagnard demonstrates Clement's dependence on Philo, Life of Moses 2.95–135 for this theme.

24. Origen, , Homilies on Leviticus 1.4Google Scholar (6.285.22–25) and 9.8 (6.433.10–18).

25. Ibid., 5.4 (6.341–342).

26. Ibid., 6.5 (6.367).

27. Origen, , On First Principles Preface.3 (5.9).Google Scholar See also fragment 47 in Claude Jenkins, “Origen on 1 Corinthians,“ The Journal of Theological Studies 9(1907–1908): 240.Google Scholar

28. Origen, , Commentary on John 13. 47. 307–308 (4. 273. 12–22).Google Scholar

29. Origen, , Commentary on Matthew 11. 5 (10. 41.2–42.32).Google Scholar

30. Ibid., 13. 11–12 (10. 302.17–305.32).

31. See, for example, fragment 18 in Jenkins (JTS 9: 354),Google Scholar where Origen so interprets 1 Corinthians 4: 1–4 as to distinguish the functions of the apostle in his exoteric role as a “minister of Christ” from his functions in his esoteric role as a “steward of the mysteries of God.” Origen, , Commentary on John 13. 18. 109–111Google Scholar (4. 242. 10–11) and Homilies on Leviticus 4. 6 (6. 273. 12–22) are also informative; in the latter Origen depicts Paul, in his esoteric role, as high priest.

32. Origin, , Commentary on Matthew 15. 7 (10. 365–370).Google Scholar

33. Origen, , Homilies on Isaiah 6. 4 (8. 8.15–9.10).Google Scholar

34. Origen, , Commentary on John 32. 17 (4. 453.6–454.11).Google Scholar

35. See, for example, Joachim, Wach, Sociology of Religion (Chicago, 1956), pp. 46–47.Google Scholar

36. Origen, , Homilies on Jeremiah 14.15 (3.122.11–21).Google Scholar

37. See Syriac Didascalia 9, trans. Hugh Conolly (Oxford, 1929), p. 86 for the earliest attestation of this usage in the East and the works of Cyprian for its attestation (with regard to bishops) in the West. Origen seems to refer to this practice, though disparagingly, in Homilies on Jeremiah 12.3Google Scholar (3.89.15.27) and Homilies on Numbers 2.1 (7.9.22–27).

38. For Clement's “apostolic succession” see Stromateis 1.11.2 (2.8.20–9.3), 1.12.55.1 (2.35.15–17), 5.4.26.5 (2.352.18–19), and 5.10.63.2 (2.368.14–15).

39. Thus Adolf Harnack argued that the bishop is essential to Origen's understanding of the church (Der kirchengeschichtliche Ertrag der exegetischen Arbeiten des Origenes, 2 vols. [Leipzig, 1924], 2:129–130).Google Scholar

40. Origen, , Contra Celsum 6.7 (2.106).Google Scholar See also 3.48 (1.244.17–245.2).

41. Origen, , Commentary on Matthew 14.21–22 (10.344–349).Google Scholar For angelic marriages see also Hermas, Shepherd, Similitude 8.3.3, and the accounts of Ptolemaeus in Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.1.7.1 and Clement, , Excerpts from Theodotus 64.1 (3.128).Google Scholar

42. See Origen, , Commentary on John 6.59Google Scholar (4.167) and Homilies on Luke 17.1 (92.110) as well as the commentary on I Corinthians 1:2, fragment 1 in Jenkins's collection (JTS 9:232).Google Scholar Compare Origen, On Prayer 6.4 (2.314.15–25).

43. Origen, On First Principles 1.8.1 (5.95) and Homilies on Luke 12.3 (92.146).

44. Origen, , Homilies on Jeremiah 11.3Google Scholar (3.80–81)and fragment 50 (3.223).

45. Origen, , Homilies on Numbers 22.4 (7.209.3–14).Google Scholar

46. See Contra Celsum 6.7 (2.106) and Series Commentary on Matthew 20 (11.35).

47. Origen, , Homilies on Numbers 9.1 (7.54.9–10).Google Scholar

48. Origen, , Homilies on Genesis 16.5 (6.142.6–11).Google Scholar

49. Origen, , Commentary on Matthew 16.22 (10.549–550).Google Scholar

50. Ibid., 16.8 (10.492.24–31).

51. Ibid., 16.8 (10.494.3–4).

52. Origen, , Homilies on Ezechiel 2.2 (8.342.23–343.3).Google Scholar Compare his Commentary on John 19.7 (4.306.32–307.7).

53. Origen, , Homilies on Numbers 2.1 (7.9.22–27).Google Scholar

54. Origen, , Series Commentary on Matthew 12 (11.23.2–5).Google Scholar Compare Clement, Stromateis 6.13.106.2 (2.485.10–17).

55. Balthasar, Hans Urs von, “Le Mysterion d'Origène,” Recherches de science religzeuse 26 (1936): 513–562 and 27 (1937): 38–64, p. 45.Google Scholar

56. Ibid., pp. 49–50.

57. Ibid., p. 50.

58. Origen, , Commentary on Matthew 12.5Google Scholar (10.103.29–31 and 10.105.2–5).

59. Ibid., 12.10 (10.84.24–33).

60. Ibid., 12.10 (10.85.25–86.2).

61. Ibid., 12.11(10.86.15–88.12).

62. Ibid., 12.12 (10.90.1–11). Such a person is, in fact, the only true Christian; any one disturbed that many ostensible Christians do not meet these standards should remember that “many are called but few are chosen” (Ibid., 12.12 [90.11–91.14] and 17.24 [10.650.1–652.25]).

63. Ibid., 12.14 (10.96.6–32).

64. Ibid., 12.14 (10.98.28–99.10). See also Contra Celsum 6.77 (2.147.16–22).

65. Ibid., 12.14 (10.99.27–32). See also his Homilies on Leviticus 14.2–4 (6.479–487, especially 479.18–26) and Homilies on Judges 2.5 (7.479.1–23).

66. Ibid., 12.14 (10.100.17–26).

67. Origen, fragment 24 on 1 Corinthians (Jenkins, , JTS 9:364),Google Scholar Commentary on Romans, Preface (Heinrich, CarlLommatzsch, Eduard, ed., Origenes Opera omnia, 25 vols. [Berlin, 1831–1848], 6: 3–4),Google ScholarHomilies on Exodus 6.9 (6.201.12–19), Contra Celsum 3.51(1.247.20–248.5), and Series Commentary on Matthew 117 (11.247.9–22), all written later than On Prayer, seem to indicate that Origen abandoned the rigorist position.

68. Origen, , On Prayer 28.8–10 (2.380–381),Google Scholar trans. Oulton, J. E. L. in Chadwick, Henry and Oulton, J.E.L., eds., Alexandrian Christianity (Philadelphia, 1954), pp. 309–310.Google Scholar

69. Origen, Homily on Psalm 37 2.6 (Lommatzsch ed., 12.267–268).

70. Origen, , Commentary on John 32.12 (14.444.31–32).Google Scholar

71. Klaus, Koschorke, Die Polemik der Gnostiker gegen das kirchliche Christentum (Leiden, 1978), especially pp. 220–232.Google Scholar

72. Peter, Brown, The Making of Late Antiquity (Cambridge, Mass., 1978), pp. 70–73.Google Scholar