Origen of Alexandria, On First Principles Preface
All who believe and are certain that grace and truth came through Jesus Christ, and who know that Christ is truth — just as he himself said, ‘I am the truth’ (John 14:6) — receive the knowledge that moves people to live well and blessedly from nowhere else but Christ’s own words and teaching. When we speak of Christ’s words, we do not mean only what he taught as a man in the flesh; Christ was the Word of God in Moses and the prophets long before. Without the Word of God, how could they have prophesied about Christ? It would not be hard to prove from the divine Scriptures that Moses and the prophets were filled with the Spirit of Christ and spoke and acted accordingly, but I aim to finish this work as briefly as possible. One testimony from Paul in his letter to the Hebrews will suffice: ‘By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, choosing rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. He considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt’ (Hebrews 11:24–26). And after Christ’s ascension, Paul indicates that Christ spoke in him: ‘Or do you seek proof that Christ is speaking in me?’ (2 Corinthians 13:3).
Since many who profess faith in Christ disagree not only in small matters but also in the great and major ones — about God, about the Lord Jesus Christ, about the Holy Spirit, and about other creatures such as dominions and holy virtues — it seems necessary first to lay down a clear and manifest rule for each of these, and only then to investigate the rest. Just as we stopped seeking truth among the many Greeks and barbarians who promised it but held false opinions, once we believed that the Son of God, Christ, is the truth and that we must learn it from him, so now, when many think they grasp the things of Christ yet differ from one another, the ecclesiastical preaching preserved through apostolic succession and remaining in the churches to this day is the only truth to be believed, because it does not disagree with the ecclesiastical and apostolic tradition.
It is necessary to know that the holy apostles, when preaching the faith of Christ, handed down plainly to all believers — even to those who seemed slower in pursuing divine knowledge — the things they judged necessary. They left the reasoning behind their assertions to be investigated by those who would merit the excellent gifts of the Spirit, especially the grace of speech, wisdom, and knowledge through the Holy Spirit. About some things they simply said they exist, but they were silent about how or why they exist, so that the more studious among their successors, lovers of wisdom, might have an exercise in which to show the fruit of their genius, those who prepare themselves to be worthy and capable of receiving wisdom.
The matters plainly handed down by apostolic preaching are these. First, there is one God who created and ordered all things, and who, when nothing existed, brought everything into being: the God of the first creation and ordering of the world, the God of all the just — Adam, Abel, Seth, Enos, Enoch, Noah, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, the twelve patriarchs, Moses, and the prophets. This God, in the last days, as he had promised through his prophets, sent the Lord Jesus Christ, first to call Israel, and then the Gentiles after Israel’s unfaithfulness. This God is just and good, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospels, and who is the God of the apostles and of both the Old and New Testaments. Next, Jesus Christ, who came, was born before all creation from the Father. Having served the Father in the ordering of all things — ‘for through him all things were made’ — he emptied himself in the last times, became man, was incarnate, and, being God, remained what he was, God. He assumed a body like ours, differing only in being born of a virgin and the Holy Spirit. Because this Jesus Christ was truly born and suffered, not in mere appearance, he truly died this common death; he truly rose from the dead, conversed with his disciples after the resurrection, and was taken up. Then they handed down that the Holy Spirit is associated with the Father and the Son in honor and dignity. It is not yet clearly discerned whether he is begotten or unbegotten, or whether he is also to be regarded as the Son of God; these things must be investigated from Holy Scripture and searched out sagaciously. Certainly the church preaches that the Holy Spirit inspired all the saints, prophets, and apostles, and that there was not one Spirit in the Old Testament and another in those inspired at Christ’s advent.
After this comes the teaching that the soul, having its own substance and life, when it departs this world will be disposed according to its merits: either to inherit eternal life and blessedness, if its deeds have earned it, or to be handed over to eternal fire and torments, if the guilt of sins has turned it away. There will also be a time of the resurrection of the dead, and this body, now sown in corruption, will rise in incorruption; what is sown in dishonor will rise in glory (1 Corinthians 15:42–43). It is also defined in ecclesiastical preaching that every rational soul possesses free will and has a struggle against the devil, his angels, and contrary powers, because they try to burden it with sins, while we, if we live rightly and wisely, strive to free ourselves from such stain. From this it follows that we are not subject to necessity forcing us to do good or evil even against our will. If we are masters of our own choices, perhaps some powers may attack us toward sin and others help us toward salvation, but we are not compelled by necessity to act rightly or wrongly. That is the view of those who say the course and movements of the stars cause human actions — not only those outside our freedom, but even those in our power. About the soul, whether it is derived from seed so that its reason or substance is inserted into bodily seeds, or whether it has another beginning, and whether that beginning is generated or ungenerated, or whether it is imposed on the body from outside — the preaching does not clearly distinguish.
The ecclesiastical preaching also taught that the devil, his angels, and contrary powers exist, but it did not clearly explain what they are or how they are. Many hold the opinion that the devil was an angel who became an apostate and persuaded many angels to turn away with him, and they are now called his angels. There is also the fact that this world was made and had a beginning, and will be dissolved because of its own corruption. But what was before this world, or what will be after it, is not clearly known to many; the sermon on these things is not evident in ecclesiastical preaching.
It is also said that the Scriptures were written through the Spirit of God and have a meaning not only manifest but also latent; the things described are forms of certain sacraments and images of divine things. The whole church holds that all law is spiritual, yet not all that the law breathes is known to everyone, but only to those to whom the grace of the Holy Spirit is given in the word of wisdom and knowledge. The term ‘incorporeal’ is not only unusual among many others but also unknown in our Scriptures. If someone tries to cite the book called the Doctrine of Peter, where the Savior seems to say to the disciples, ‘I am not an incorporeal demon,’ first it must be answered that this book is not among the ecclesiastical books, and it must be shown that this writing is neither Peter’s nor that of any other inspired by the Spirit of God. Even if that were conceded, the sense indicated there is not the same as what Greek or gentile authors show when they discuss the incorporeal nature of philosophers. In that book, ‘incorporeal demon’ was said because the habit or circumscription of the demonic body is not like our coarser, visible body; but according to the sense of the one who composed that writing, it must be understood that he said he does not have the kind of body demons have (which is naturally subtle, like a thin air, and for this reason is considered or called incorporeal by many), but that he has a solid, palpable body. In human custom, anything not like that is called incorporeal by the simpler or more ignorant — just as if someone were to call the air we breathe incorporeal, because it is not a body that can be grasped, held, or resisted.
We must still inquire whether the thing itself that Greek philosophers call ‘incorporeal’ is found in Holy Scripture under another name. It must also be inquired how God himself should be understood: whether as corporeal and deformed in some way, or as a nature other than bodies, which is not clearly designated in our preaching. The same must be inquired about Christ and the Holy Spirit, and about every soul and every rational nature. Ecclesiastical preaching also holds that there are angels of God and good powers who minister to him for the salvation of men; but when they were created, or what they are, or how they are, is not clearly distinguished. About the sun, moon, and stars, whether they are animate or inanimate, is not clearly handed down. Therefore, we must use these things as elements and foundations, according to the commandment: ‘Illuminate for yourselves the light of knowledge’, so that everyone who wishes may build a coherent body of knowledge from the reason of all these things, investigate what is true about each, and form one body of examples and affirmations — either those found in Holy Scripture or those discovered through investigation and right reasoning.
Latin
Omnes qui eredunt et certi sunt quod gratia et veritas per lesum Christum facta sit, et Christum esse veritatem norunt, secundum quod ipse dixit: “Ego sum veritas”, scientiam quae provocat homines ad bene beateque vivendum non aliunde quam ab ipsis Christi verbis doetrinaque suscipiunt. Christi autem verbis dieimus non his solum, quae homo factus atque in carne positus docuit; et prius namque Christus dei verbum in Moyse atque in prophetis erat. Nam sine verbo dei quomodo poterant prophetare de Christo? Ad cuius rei probationem non esset difficile ex divinis seripturis ostendere, quomodo vel Moyses vel prophetae spiritu Christi repleti vel locuti sunt vel gesserunt omnia quae gesserunt, nisi studii nobis esset, praesens hoc opus omni qua possumus brevitate suecingere. Unde sufficere aestimo uno hoc Pauli testimonio debere nos uti ex epistula, quam ad Hebraeos scribit, in qua ita ait: “Fide magnus factus Moyses negavit se dici filium filiae Pharaonis, magis eligens afflietari cum populo dei quam temporalem habere peccati iueunditatem, maiores divitias aestimans Aegyptiorum thesauris inproperium Christi”. Sed et post adsumptionem eius in caelos quod in apostolis suis loeutus sit, hoc modo indicat Paulus: “Aut numquid probamentum quaeritis eius, qui in me loquitur Christus?” 2. Quoniam ergo multi ex his, qui Christo se credere profitentur, non solum in parvis et minimis discordant, verum etiam in magnis et maximis, id est vel de deo vel de ipso domino lesu Christo vel de spiritu sancto, non solum autem de his, sed et de alus creaturis, id est vel de dominationibus vel de virtutibus sanctis: propter hoc necessarium videtur prius de his singulis certam lineam manifestamque regulam ponere, tum deinde etiam de ceteris quaerere. Sicut enim, multis apud Graecos et barbaros pollicentibus veritatem, desivimus apud omnes eam quaerere, qui eam falsis opinionibus asserebant, posteaquam eredidimus fihum esse dei Christum et ab ipso nobis hane discendam esse persuasimus: ita eum multi sint, qui se putant sentire quae Christi sunt, et nonnulh eorum diversa a prioribus sentiant, servetur vero ecclesiastica praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab apostolis tradita et usque ad praesens in ecclesiis permanens, illa sola credenda est veritas, quae in nullo ab ecclesiastica et apostolica traditione discordat. 3. Illud autem scire oportet, quoniam sancti apostoli fidem Christi praedieantes de quibusdam quidem, quaecumque necessaria crediderunt, p omnibus eredentibus, etiam his, qui pigriores erga inquisitionem divinae scientiae videbantur, manifestissime tradiderunt, rationem seilicet assertioms eorum relinquentes ab his inquirendam, qui spiritus dona excellentia mererentur et praecipue sermonis, sapientiae et scientiae gratiam per ipsum sanctum spiritum percepissent; de aliis vero dixerunt quidem quia sint, quomodo autem aut unde sint, siluerunt, profecto ut studiosiores quique ex posteris suis, qui amatores essent sapientiae, exercitium habere possent, in quo ingenii sui fructum ostenderent, hi videlicet, qui dignos se et capaces ad recipiendam sapientiam praepararent. 4. Species vero eorum, quae per praedicationem apostolicam manifeste traduntur, istae sunt. Primo, quod unus est deus, qui omnia creavit atque composuit, quique, cum nihil esset, esse fecit universa, deus a prima creatura et conditione mundi, omnium iustorum deus, Adam Abel Seth Enos Enoch No? Sem Abraham Isaac lacob duodecim patriarcharum Moysei et prophetarum; et quod hie deus in novissimis diebus, sicut per prophetas suos ante promiserat, misit dominum lesum Christum, primo quidem vocaturum Israhel, secundo vero etiam gentes post perfidiam populi Israhel. Hie deus iustus et bonus, pater domini nostri lesu Christi, legem et prophetas et evangelia ipse dedit, qui et apostolorum deus est et veteris ac novi testamenti. Tum deinde quia Christus lesus, ipse qui venit, ante omnem creaturam natus ex patre est. Qui cum in omnium conditione patri ministrasset, “per ipsum” namque “omnia facta sunt”, novissimis temporibus se ipsum exinaniens homo factus est, incarnatus est, cum deus esset, et homo factus mansit quod erat, deus. Corpus assumsit nostro corpori simile, eo solo differens, quod natum ex virgine et spiritu sancto est. Et quoniam hie lesus Christus natus et passus est in veritate, et non per phantasiam, communem hanc mortem vere mortuus; vere enim et a mortuis resurrexit et post resurrectionem conversatus cum diseipulis suis assumtus est. Tum deinde honore ac dignitate patri ac filio sociatum tradiderunt spiritum sanctum. In hoe non iam manifeste discernitur, utrum natus aut innatus, vel filius etiam ipse dei habendus sit, neene; sed inquirenda iam ista pro viribus sunt de sancta scriptura et sagaci perquisitione investiganda. Sane quod iste spiritus sanctus unumquemque sanctorum vel prophetarum vel apostolorum inspiraverit, et non alius spiritus in veteribus, alius vero in his, qui in adventu Christi inspirati sunt, fuerit, manifestissime in ecclesia praedicatur. 9. Post haec iam quod anima substantiam vitamque habens propriam, cum ex hoe mundo discesserit, pro suis meritis dispensabitur, sive vitae aeternae ac beatitudinis hereditate potitura, si hoc ei sua gesta praestiterint, sive igni aeterno ac supplieus mancipanda, si in hoc eam scelerum culpa detorserit; sed et quia erit tempus resurrectionis mortuorum, eum corpus hoc, quod nune “in corruptione seminatur, surget in incorruptionec, et quod “seminatur in ignominia, surget in gloria”. Est et illud definitum in eeclesiastica praedicatione, omnem animam rationabilem esse liberi arbitru et voluntatis; esse quoque ei certamen adversum diabolum et angelos eius contrariasque virtutes, ex eo quod ili peccatis eam onerare contendant, nos vero si recte consulteque vivamus, ab huiuscemodi labe exuere nos conemur. Unde et consequens est intellegere, non nos necessitati esse subiectos, ut omni modo, etiamsi nolimus, vel mala vel bona agere cogamur. Si enim nostri arbitri! sumus, inpugnare nos fortasse possint aliquae virtutes ad peccatum et aliae iuvare ad salutem, non tamen necessitate cogimur vel recte agere vel male; quod fieri arbitrantur hi, qui stellarum cursum et motus causam dieunt humanorum esse gestorum, non solum eorum, quae extra arbitrii accidunt libertatem, sed et eorum, quae in nostra sunt posita potestate. De anima vero utrum ex seminis traduce ducatur, ita ut ratio ipsius vel substantia inserta ipsis corporalibus seminibus habeatur, an vero aliud habeat initium, et hoc ipsum initium si genitum est aut non genitum, vel certe si extrinsecus corpori inditur, necne: non satis manifesta praedicatione distinguitur. 6. De diabolo quoque et angelis eius contrarüsque virtutibus ecelesiastica praedicatio docuit quoniam sint quidem haec, quae autem sint vel quomodo sint, non satis clare exposuit. Apud plurimos tamen ista habetur opinio, quod angelus fuerit iste diabolus, et apostata effectus quam plurimos angelorum secum declinare persuaserit, qui et nune usque angel ipsius nuncupantur. 7. Est praeterea et illud in eeclesiastiea praedicatione, quod mundus iste factus sit et a certo tempore coeperit et sit pro 1psa sui corruptione solvendus. Quid tamen ante hunc mundum fuerit, aut quid post mundum erit, jam non pro manifesto multis innotuit. Non enim evidens de his in ecclesiastica praedicatione sermo profertur. 8. Tum deinde quod per spiritum dei seripturae conscriptae sint et sensum habeant non eum solum, qui in manifesto est, sed et alium quendam latentem quam plurimos. Formae enim sunt haec quae descripta sunt sacramentorum quorundam et divinarum rerum imagines. De quo totius eeclesiae una sententia est, esse quidem omnem legem spiritalem, non tamen ea, quae spirat lex, esse omnibus nota nisi his solis, quibus gratia spiritus sancti in verbo sapientiae ac scientiae condonatur. Appellatio autem (id est incorporei) non solum apud multos alios, verum etiam apud nostras scripturas inusitata est et incognita. Si vero quis velt nobis proferre ex illo libello, qui Petri Doctrina appellatur, ubi salvator videtur ad discipulos dieere: “Non sum daemonium incorporeum”, primo respondendum est ei quoniam liber ipse inter libros eeclesiasticos non habetur, et ostendendum quia neque Petri est ipsa scriptura neque alterius cuiusquam, qui spiritu dei fuerit inspiratus. Quod etiamsi ipsum concederetur, non idem sensus inibi ex isto sermone indicatur, qui a graecis vel gentilibus auctoribus ostenditur, eum de incorporea natura a philosophis disputatur. In hoc enim libello -incorporeum daemonium: dixit pro eo, quod ipse ille quicumque est habitus vel eircumscriptio daemoniei corporis non est similis huie nostro crassiori et visibili corpori; sed secundum sensum eius, qui composuit illam scripturam, intellegendum est quod dixit, id est non se habere tale corpus quale habent daemones (quod est naturaliter subtile quoddam et velut aura tenue, et propter hoe vel putatur a multis vel dicitur incorporeum), sed habere se corpus solidum et palpabile. In consuetudine vero hominum omne, quod tale non fuerit, incorporeum a simplicioribus vel imperitioribus nominatur; velut si quis aérem istum quo fruimur incorporeum dieat, quoniam quidem non est tale corpus, ut conprehendi ac teneri possit urgentique resistere. 9. Quaeremus tamen si vel alio nomine res ipsa, quam graeci philosophi (id est ineorporeum) dicunt, in sanctis scripturis invenitur. Deus quoque ipse quomodo intellegi debeat requirendum est, corporeus et secundum aliquem habitum deformatus, an alterius naturae quam corpora sunt, quod utique in praedicatione nostra manifeste non designatur. Eadem quoque etiam de Christo et de saneto spiritu requirenda sunt, sed et de omni anima atque omni rationabili natura nihilominus requirendum est. Est etiam illud in eeclesiastica praedicatione, esse angelos dei quosdam et virtutes bonas, qui ei ministrant ad salutem hominum con- "^" summandam; sed quando isti creati sint, vel quales, aut quomodo sint, non satis in manifesto distinguitur. De sole autem et luna et stellis, utrum animantia sint an sine anima, manifeste non traditur. Oportet igitur velut elementis ac fundamentis huiusmodi uti secundum mandatum, quod dicit: “Inluminate vobis lumen scientiae”, omnem qui eupit seriem quandam et corpus ex horum omnium ratione perficere, ut manifestis et necessarüs assertionibus de singulis quibusque quid sit in vero rimetur, et unum, ut diximus, corpus efficiat exemplis et affirmationibus, vel his, quas in sanctis scripturis invenerit, vel quas ex consequentiae ipsius indagine ac recti tenore reppererit.