Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Translation of Pamphilus' Defence of Origen.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Translation of
Pamphilus’ Defence of Origen.
Written at Pinetum a.d. 397.
While Rufinus was staying at
Pinetum, a Christian named Macarius2780
| 2780 See the account in Rufinus’ Apology I. 11. | sought
his advice and assistance. He was engaged in a controversy with the
Mathematici, a class of men who had deserted the scientific studies
from which they took their name, and had turned to astrology and a
belief in Fatalism. Macarius, having heard of Origen’s greatness
in the region of Christian speculation, earnestly desired some
knowledge of his writings: but was unable to attain it through
ignorance of Greek. He declared to Rufinus that he had had a dream in
which he saw a ship laden with Eastern merchandize arriving in Italy,
and that it was declared to him that this ship would contain the means
of attaining the knowledge he desired. The coming of Rufinus seemed to
him the fulfilment of his dream, and he earnestly besought him to
impart to him some of the treasures of his Greek learning, and
especially to translate for him Origen’s great speculative work,
the Περὶ
᾽Αρχῶν, that is
On First Principles.2781
| 2781 The word may also mean On beginnings, or On Principalities and
Powers: these ideas being connected together in the speculation of the
Alexandrian theology. | Rufinus
hesitated, knowing that there was a strong prejudice against Origen,
and that he was looked on, especially in the West, as a heretic, though
his writings were little known there. He yielded, however, to the
solicitations of Macarius: but to guard against the imputation of
heresy, he undertook three preliminary works. First, he translated the
Apology of the Martyr Pamphilus for Origen; secondly, he wrote a short
treatise on the Adulteration by heretics of the works of Origen; and,
thirdly, in translating the Περὶ
᾽Αρχῶν he
prefixed to it an elaborate Preface in justification of his course in
translating the work. All these documents became the subject of
vehement controversy which found its expression in the letter of Jerome
to his friends at Rome, and the Apologies of Rufinus and Jerome
translated in this volume.
The Apology of Pamphilus for
Origen forms the sixth book of a work undertaken by him in connexion
with Eusebius of Cæsarea, the Church Historian. Pamphilus was a
great collector of books, and a learned man, but Eusebius was the chief
writer. Pamphilus was put to death in the last persecution, that under
Galerius; and Eusebius having at a later time fallen under suspicion of
Arianism, it was attempted by those who disliked Origen, to dissociate
Pamphilus from all connexion with the work. There seems however no
reason to doubt, notwithstanding Jerome’s violent protestations,
that Pamphilus was associated with Eusebius throughout the work, and
that he actually wrote the sixth book. The translation of this Apology
was made first, and sent out with a Preface which runs as
follows:
You have been moved by your
desire to know the truth, Macarius, who are “a man greatly
beloved,”2782
to make a
request of me, which will bring you the blessing attached to the
knowledge of the truth; but it will win for me the greatest indignation
on the part of those who consider themselves aggrieved whenever any one
does not think evil of Origen. It is true that it is not my opinion
about him that you have asked for, but that of the holy martyr
Pamphilus; and you have requested to have the book which he is said to
have written in his defence in Greek translated for you into Latin:
nevertheless I do not doubt that there will be some who will think
themselves aggrieved if I say anything in his defence even in the words
of another man. I beg them to do nothing in the spirit of presumption
and of prejudice; and, since we must all stand before the judgment seat
of Christ, not to refuse to hear the truth spoken, lest haply they
should do wrong through ignorance. Let them consider that to wound the
consciences of their weaker brethren by false accusations is to sin
against Christ; and therefore let them not lend their ears to the
accusers, nor seek an account of another man’s faith from a third
party, especially when an opportunity is given them for gaining
personal and direct knowledge, and the substance and quality of each
man’s faith is to be known by his own confession. For so the
Scripture says:2783
“With
the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth
confession is made unto salvation”: and:2784
“By his words shall each man be
justified, and by his word shall he be condemned.” The opinions
of Origen in the various parts of Scripture are clearly set forth in
the present work: as to the cause of our finding certain places in
which he contradicts himself, an explanation will be offered in the
short document subjoined.2785
| 2785 See the Epilogue, infra. | But as for
myself, I hold that which has been handed down to us from the holy
fathers, namely, that the Holy Trinity is coeternal, and of a single
nature, virtue and substance; that the Son of God in these last times
has been made man, has suffered for our transgressions and rose
again from the dead in the very flesh in which he suffered, and thereby
imparted the hope of the resurrection to the whole race of mankind.
When we speak of the resurrection of the flesh, we do so, not with any
subterfuges, as is slanderously reported by certain persons; we believe
that it is this very flesh in which we are now living which will rise
again, not one kind of flesh instead of another, nor another body than
the body of this flesh. When we speak of the body rising we do so in
the words of the apostle; for he himself made use of this word: and
when we speak of the flesh, our confession is that of the Creed. It is
an absurd invention of maliciousness to think that the human body is
different from the flesh. However, whether we speak of that which is to
rise, according to the common faith, as the flesh, or, according to the
Apostle, as the body, this we must believe, that according to the clear
statement of the Apostle, that which shall rise shall rise in power and
in glory; it will rise an incorruptible and a spiritual body: for
“corruption cannot inherit incorruption.” We must maintain
this preëminence of the body, or flesh, which is to be: but, with
this proviso, we must hold that the resurrection of the flesh is
perfect and entire; we must on the one hand maintain the identity of
the flesh, while on the other we must not detract from the dignity and
glory of the incorruptible and spiritual body. For so the Scripture
speaks. This is what is preached by the reverend Bishop John at
Jerusalem; this we with him both confess and hold. If any one either
believes or teaches otherwise, or insinuates that we believe
differently from the exposition of our faith, let him be anathema. Let
this then be taken as a record of our belief by any who desire to know
it. Whatever we read and whatever we do is in accordance with this
account of our faith; we follow the words of the Apostle,2786
“proving all things, holding
fast that which is good, avoiding every form of evil.”2787
“And as many as walk by this
rule, peace be upon them and upon the Israel of God.”E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
