Origen: Kierkegaard’s Equivocal Appropriation of Origen of Alexandria

Keyword(s):  
Open Theology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 388-400
Author(s):  
Taylor Ross

Abstract The present article asks after Gregory of Nyssa’s debts to Basil the Great, and this by re-examining two texts the former wrote shortly after the latter’s death: De hominis opificio and Apologia in Hexaemeron. It does so on the premise, mostly promissory for now, that Gregory’s efforts to sort through Basil’s legacy in his late brother’s wake was part and parcel of the Nyssen’s career-long project to reprise Origen of Alexandria under a “pro-Nicene” banner. Defending his elder sibling’s apparently incomplete Homiliae in Hexameron while also disputing their basic premise, that is, gave Gregory an opportunity to negotiate the dialectic of dependence and distinction that ultimately determined his reception of earlier authorities, including the great Alexandrian they both revered. With that much longer story in sight, this article focuses on Gregory’s deployment of horticultural metaphors, especially in the Apologia in Hexaemeron, to describe his stance toward both Basil and Origen. Closer scrutiny of these images alongside his more technical means of differentiating between himself and Basil suggests that Gregory considered his own work to be both a natural development of his predecessors and, precisely thereby, the immanent perfection of their thought.


2019 ◽  
pp. 114-137
Author(s):  
Павел Лизгунов

Цель данной статьи - раскрыть понятие смирения у Климента и Оригена Александрийских. Для этого проводится филологический анализ употребления изучаемыми авторами слов смирение, смиренномудрие и однокоренных с ними, а также богословский анализ учения авторов о соответствующих добродетелях - в сравнении с предшествующей традицией раскрытия этой добродетели. Авторы, стоящие у истоков христианской богословской науки, обобщают сказанное прежде них о добродетели смирения и вносят собственный вклад в христианское учение о смирении. В текстах Климента и Оригена встречаются как античное словоупотребление, в котором термин «смирение» имеет уничижительный смысл, так и христианское употребление в значении нравственной добродетели. Их учение о христианских добродетелях смирения, смиренномудрия и кротости основывается на Священном Писании и содержит в себе черты учения мужей апостольских, ранних апологетов и борцов с гностицизмом. В их текстах впервые ставится вопрос о соотношении христианского и античного учений о смирении, который они пытаются решить в духе примирения античных и христианской этических систем. При этом оба автора указывают на бóльшую древность библейского учения по сравнению с учением Платона, а Климентпрямо называетплатоновское высказывание о добродетельном смирении заимствованием из Ветхого Завета. В ряде случаев зависимость авторов от античной мысли приводит к неточностям и натяжкам в передаче христианского нравственного учения. В частности, это проявляется в учении Климента о добродетельной гордости и в отвержении Оригеном библейских «телесных» форм смирения в пользу смирения по преимуществу интеллектуального. The purpose of this article is to reveal the concept of humility among Clement and Origen of Alexandria. To do this, a philological analysis of the use by the authors of the words humility, humility and cognate with them, as well as a theological analysis of the teachings of the authors about the corresponding virtues, is carried out in comparison with the previous tradition of revealing this virtue. Their teaching on the Christian virtues of humility, humility and meekness is based on the Holy Scriptures and contains features of the teachings of the husbands of the apostolic, early apologists and fighters against Gnosticism. For the first time, their texts raise the question of the relationship between Christian and antique teachings on humility, which they are trying to solve in the spirit of reconciliation of ancient and Christian ethical systems. At the same time, both authors point to the greater antiquity of the biblical teaching in comparison with the teachings of Plato, and Clement directly calls the Platonic statement about virtuous humility borrowing from the Old Testament. In some cases, the authors’ dependence on ancient thought leads to inaccuracies and stretches in the transmission of Christian moral teachings. In particular, this is manifested in Clement’s doctrine of virtuous pride and in Origen’s rejection of the biblical «bodily» forms of humility in favor of humility predominantly intellectual.


2019 ◽  
pp. 35-56
Author(s):  
Arthur P. Urbano

In his exegesis of the Transfiguration account in the Commentary on Matthew, Origen of Alexandria presents Jesus’s transfigured robes as a medium of revelation: to the disciples who witnessed the event and to the Christian interpreter. By contemplating Jesus’s garments, the latter will discover revealed knowledge on the nature of Christ and of the scriptures. This chapter examines Origen’s exegesis through the lens of what Roland Barthes called “written-clothing,” an infusion of garments with definitive value through descriptions and associations that make them signifiers of cultural values. Utilizing a “poetics of clothing” that highlights the color and fabric of Jesus’s robes while associating them with significant temporal, spatial, and historical markers rooted in Scripture and philosophy, Origen enhances the textual spectacle of Jesus’s garments. Moreover he constructs a cognitive model of written-clothing that at once verbalizes Jesus’s garments and “garmentizes” the Scriptures. In the end Origen creates an understanding of Jesus’s robes that transports the reader into contemplation of the incarnate Christ.


Persons ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 52-84
Author(s):  
Scott M. Williams

By surveying the history of Christian theology of the Trinity and Incarnation from Origen of Alexandria to William of Ockham, this chapter shows that Boethius’s addition of rationality to the definition of persona is a significant moment in the history of personhood. Among Greek and Syriac philosophical theologians, rationality was not included in theorizing about what made each divine individual or hypostasis (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) distinct from the others. The evidence surveyed suggests that rationality is included in the definition of a persona only in Latin authors after Boethius. Nevertheless, rationality did no substantive work in Boethius’s or later Latin authors’ theorizing about the Trinity or Incarnation with regard to personhood. Richard of St. Victor replaced Boethius’s “individual substance” with “incommunicable existence” in order to give a fully general definition of persona. This change was widely accepted by later philosophers (e.g., John Locke) and theologians.


2019 ◽  
Vol 112 (3) ◽  
pp. 376-406
Author(s):  
Michael Zeddies

AbstractTheLetter to Theodoremay need to be reattributed to Origen of Alexandria. Many of its features seem demonstrably Origenian, and its language aligns with early Christian and Origenian usage. Two noncanonical gospel fragments in the letter do not betray a modern author, but rather evoke early Christian symbolism and narrative structure. The single garment worn by a character in the first fragment reflects Christian symbolism and resembles the philosopher’s garment, which many early Christians adopted and portrayed in material artifacts. Origen’s intellectual interests can explain the letter’s preparation for philosophical exegesis, and its language reflects his text-critical practice. Nevertheless, Origen’s circumstances indicate the text of the noncanonical gospel fragments is unreliable. The letter also echoes Papias in the manner that Origen does. Morton Smith’s account of its discovery does not betray a forgery or hoax, but plausibly depends on other nonfiction works of manuscript discoveries written during the 1960s. Further work may be needed to secure attribution, but Origenian authorship is a simpler explanation of the evidence than modern forgery.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document