Origen: An Ideal Scholar

Origen
Origen

Origen was a Christian philosopher, Biblical scholar and theologian of the third century, His full name in Latin, Oregenes Adamantius, can perhaps be translated as Origen the Immovable. Apart from his erudition, imagination, intellect and piety, I would use one word to describe my impression of Origen: gravitas. He is the type of scholar who demands respect, even from his most formidable opponents, without at the same time making them feel small, for they recognize in him the qualities they aspire to themselves.

To me, Origen demonstrates both by word and by example what would make an ideal scholar. I wish I could be instructed by him.

First, comprehensive knowledge of the subject matter. Such is Origen’s mastery of Greek philosophy and Judeo-Christian theology, that he can not only ascertain the validity of philosophical and theological arguments, but also make inferences of the characters of the people making the arguments. In Against Celsus, for instance, Origen often argues ad hominem. Coming from a lesser person, it would be improper, but from him, it seems rather appropriate: Celsus frequently takes things out of context, omits things that contradict his own position, and makes vague accusations without clear and concrete evidence. Origen points out that this type of irrational behaviour pattern reflects a character flaw, either ignorance or malice, neither of which is becoming of a scholar. Reading Origen’s critique of Celsus is like watching an entertaining chess game where one player’s level is so far above his opponent, that he can see all the possible moves for the latter, even school him on how to make a better move, and still defeat him.

Second, willingness, even eagerness, to understand diverse and opposite views. In a letter to Sextus Iulius Africanus, a Christian historian, Origen writes that he frequently has discourse with Jews on various subjects, and consults Jewish scholars on matters of translation, and spares no efforts to collect manuscripts of Jewish Scriptures to study and understand the readings from the Jewish points of view. So that he may not be found ignorant in his defense of Christianity and thereby bring reproach upon it. One of the greatest fruits of his labor that have survived is the Hexapla, a side-by-side compilation of six versions of the Hebrew Scriptures available in his time.

Third, humility and generosity. Origen is never perturbed by people who challenge his beliefs. His responses to critics, of Christianity in general or of his personal opinions, are always calm, always grounded in reason and evidence. The exchange between Africanus and Origen is another example of Origen’s scholarship and generosity. Africanus wrote to Origen, because he thought the latter had made a mistake of including Susanna among the Scripture, which he argued was plainly a “later addition” to the canonical Book of Daniel. In response, Origen wrote a letter explaining that none of the difficulties noted by Africanus had escaped him, and detailing the reasons why he included Susanna in the Scripture. At the beginning of his letter, which is ten times the length of Africanus’, Origen apologizes for lack of time to make an adequate reply, one wonders what volumes he would have written if he had had the time and opportunity!

At the end of the letter, Origen wrote, “Would that I could instruct you! But I do not now arrogate that to myself.” I suppose one could read the first sentence as, “Watch the master and learn!” It would be a fitting end to the letter, but I think inconsistent with Origen’s character. It is rather an expression of his eagerness to impart his knowledge to his brethren in Christ, that they might benefit from it. He was also not unmindful of his own Master, the ultimate Teacher.

References:

7 comments

  1. Since you wrote much on “City of God” you are probably familiar with St. Augustine’s Chapter 23 of Book XI where St. Augustine describes thinking of Origen which St. Augustine disputes. St. Augustine writes that Origen held the opinion that souls that sinned received punishment in different degrees including those placed in the world. God created the world thus as a form of prison for “restraining of evil” and souls “might, for their sins, be accommodated with bodies in which they should be shut up as in houses of correction.” St. Augustine is astounded why Origen missed the important phrase in the Scripture immediately after the six days of creation “And God saw that it was good.” Why would God give man a body of clay even before a man sins? In Book XII St. Augustine returns to Origen’s argument that God created the world with evil in it. Evil is simply the absence of good.

    St. Augustine does not reference the source for this Origen argument.

    1. Hi Galicius,

      Augustine is referencing Origen’s On First Principles, which has been published in the ANF series, and available online at CCEL and NewAdvent. Origen posits that free choice of will is the reason why there is a wide diversity and gradation of beings in the world – he anticipated the theory of evolution. To Origen, diversity is not ideal, for it falls short of divine unity. Augustine sees unity and beauty in diversity. It is conceivable that God wills diversity in the world which would manifest His manifold wisdom. So there does seem to be a point of disagreement between Origen and Augustine, but I think it is possible to reconcile their views as well.

      Nemo

      1. Thank you for your explanation Nemo. Perhaps Origen’s explanation of evil is just different from Augustine who sees evil as incongruous against a creator who loves his creatures.

        1. Both Origen and Augustine defend the doctrine of free will, which allows evil to exist in a world created by the Good. Augustine believes in eternal punishment, so even from an Augustinian perspective, the (continuous) existence of evil, as it concerns man, is not incongruous with the Goodnees of God. One could argue, in Origen’s defence, that if eternal punishment is good in the end, then it is reasonable to see the creation as good, even if it means punishment for some beings.

          The problem of evil is difficult. I think it’s partly why David Bentley Hart asserts universal salvation (and claims to align with Origen). I will keep this question in mind when I read Origen’s other major works, and see if he addresses the question of evil in depth somewhere.

        2. A further thought regarding the creation of man:

          God said to Adam, “for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.” (Genesis 3:19) This sentence, considered by itself, does not sound like a punishment at all, for it is natural for a thing to return to its origin. But understood in context, it is a punishment, because Adam lost the privilege of fellowship with God, for which purpose God created him: Adam was not merely dust, but a living soul, endowed with the spirit from God. So the statement, “you are dust”, implies a reproach, as when the Lord Jesus reproaches Peter for not setting his mind on the things of God, but on the things of man (Matthew 16:23), i.e., Peter acts as mere man, when he should act as a man of God.

          I think this is one way to reconcile the views of Origen and Augustine: The creation of man from dust is not evil, but if man clings to the ways of the clay/flesh, and refuses to ascend/cleave to God, it becomes evil for him, as it fall short of the good will of God for him. Since evil is its own punishment, according to Plato, it can be said that man is punished as being dust.

  2. Thank you Nemo for taking up this issue so thoroughly. The group Catholic Thought is reading “City of God” slowly. I would like to show, with your permission, your analysis of this issue to the group when the time comes for Book XI.

    1. Thank you for bringing up this issue, Galicius. I would not have thought about it had you not asked, so I also learned by pondering your question. As Augustine would say, if there is anything good in my comment, it is from above, if anything is amiss, it is due to my own ignorance.

Have Your Say