Papers Presented at The Eighteenth International Conference On Patristic Studies Held in Oxford 2019 Volume 8 Origen 1st Edition M. Vinzent (Editor)

Papers presented at the Eighteenth
International Conference on Patristic

Studies held in Oxford 2019 Volume 8
Origen 1st Edition M. Vinzent (Editor)
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/papers-presented-at-the-eighteenth-international-conf
erence-on-patristic-studies-held-in-oxford-2019-volume-8-origen-1st-edition-m-vinzent
-editor/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Papers presented at the Eighteenth International

Conference on Patristic Studies held in Oxford 2019
Volume 1 Introduction Historica 1st Edition M. Vinzent
(Editor)
https://ebookmeta.com/product/papers-presented-at-the-eighteenth-
international-conference-on-patristic-studies-held-in-
oxford-2019-volume-1-introduction-historica-1st-edition-m-
vinzent-editor/

Volume 5 Euchologia 1st Edition C. Rapp (Editor)
oxford-2019-volume-5-euchologia-1st-edition-c-rapp-editor/

Volume 4 Remembering Apostles as Martyrs 1st Edition S.
Witetschek
oxford-2019-volume-4-remembering-apostles-as-martyrs-1st-edition-
s-witetschek/

Volume 7 Clement of Alexandria 1st Edition V. Husek
(Editor)
oxford-2019-volume-7-clement-of-alexandria-1st-edition-v-husek-
Volume 6 Readings in Irenaeus of Lyon 1st Edition Awet
Andemicael
oxford-2019-volume-6-readings-in-irenaeus-of-lyon-1st-edition-
awet-andemicael/

Volume 3 Deacons and Diakonia Bishops Presbyters and
Laypeople 1st Edition Koet B.J.
oxford-2019-volume-3-deacons-and-diakonia-bishops-presbyters-and-
laypeople-1st-edition-koet-b-j/

Volume 2 Politics and Society The Patristic Legacy in
the Middle Ages 1st Edition J.C. Witt (Editor)
oxford-2019-volume-2-politics-and-society-the-patristic-legacy-
in-the-middle-ages-1st-edition-j-c-witt-editor/
Studies in the Eighteenth Century Papers Presented at

the David Nichol Smith Memorial Seminar Canberra 1966
1st Edition R. F. Brissenden
https://ebookmeta.com/product/studies-in-the-eighteenth-century-
papers-presented-at-the-david-nichol-smith-memorial-seminar-
canberra-1966-1st-edition-r-f-brissenden/
The Discoveries of Manuscripts from Late Antiquity

Their Impact on Patristic Studies and the Contemporary
World Conference Proceedings 2nd International
Conference on Patristic Studies Patricia Ciner (Editor)
https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-discoveries-of-manuscripts-
from-late-antiquity-their-impact-on-patristic-studies-and-the-
contemporary-world-conference-proceedings-2nd-international-
STUDIA PATRISTICA
VOL. CXI
Papers presented at the Eighteenth International Conference

on Patristic Studies held
in Oxford 2019
Edited by
MARKUS VINZENT
Volume 8:
Origen
PEETERS
LEUVEN – PARIS – BRISTOL, CT
2021
STUDIA PATRISTICA
VOL. CXI
STUDIA PATRISTICA
Editor:
Markus VINZENT, King’s College London, UK and Max Weber Centre,
University of Erfurt, Germany
Board of Directors (2019):

Carol HARRISON, Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity,
Faculty of Theology and Religion, University of Oxford, UK
Mark EDWARDS, Professor of Early Christian Studies,
Neil MCLYNN, University Lecturer in Later Roman History,
Faculty of Classics, University of Oxford, UK
Philip BOOTH, A.G. Leventis Associate Professor in Eastern Christianity,
Sophie LUNN-ROCKLIFFE, Lecturer in Patristics,
Faculty of Divinity, University of Cambridge, UK
Morwenna LUDLOW, Professor,
Theology and Religion, University of Exeter, UK
Ioannis PAPADOGIANNAKIS, Senior Lecturer in Patristics,
Department of Theology and Religious Studies, King’s College London, UK
Markus VINZENT, Professor of the History of Theology,
Department of Theology and Religious Studies, King’s College London, UK
Josef LÖSSL, Professor of Historical Theology and Intellectual History,
School of History, Archaeology and Religion, Cardiff University, UK
Lewis AYRES, Professor of Catholic and Historical Theology,
Department of Theology and Religion, Durham University, UK
John BEHR, Regius Chair in Humanity, The School of Divinity,
History, Philosophy & Art History, University of Aberdeen, UK
Anthony DUPONT, Research Professor in Christian Antiquity,
Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies, KU Leuven, Belgium
Patricia CINER (as president of AIEP), Professor,
Universidad de San Juan-Universidad Católica de Cuyo, Argentina
Clayton JEFFORD (as president of NAPS), Professor of Scripture,
Seminary and School of Theology, Saint Meinrad, IN, USA
STUDIA PATRISTICA
VOL. CXI
Papers presented at the Eighteenth International Conference

on Patristic Studies held
in Oxford 2019
Edited by
MARKUS VINZENT
Volume 8:
Origen
PEETERS
LEUVEN – PARIS – BRISTOL, CT
2021
© Peeters Publishers — Louvain — Belgium 2021
All rights reserved, including the right to translate or to
reproduce this book or parts thereof in any form.
D/2021/0602/145
ISBN: 978-90-429-4756-6
eISBN: 978-90-429-4757-3
A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.
Printed in Belgium by Peeters, Leuven

Table of Contents
Constantin-Ionuț MIHAI
The Pagan Gregory and Origen: Polemics and Apologetics in the
School of Caesarea .............................................................................. 1
Augustine M. REISENAUER
Polymorphism and Protomorphism of the Word of God in Origen’s
Contra Celsum ..................................................................................... 11
Harry LINES
The Self-Sufficiency of Scripture for Figurative Exegesis in Origen’s
Contra Celsum ..................................................................................... 23
J. José ALVIAR
Origen vs Origen: His Spiritual and Literal Interpretations of Biblical
Journeys ............................................................................................... 37
Agnès ALIAU-MILHAUD
How to Build Exegesis with the Particle καί: Some Examples by
Origen .................................................................................................. 49
Róbert SOMOS
Theologia naturalis and theologia revelata in Origen’s First Homily
on Psalm 77 ......................................................................................... 55
Tommaso INTERI
Origen and Eusebius Interpreting Psalm 77 ....................................... 65
Elizabeth Ann DIVELY LAURO

Origen’s Relational Trinity: A Clarification from his Fourth Homily
on Isaiah .............................................................................................. 77
Ryan HAECKER
Triadic Circles: On the Trinity as the Structure of the System in
Origen’s On First Principles ............................................................... 91
Miriam DECOCK
Origen’s Mediation of the Logos in his Exegesis of the Old Testament
Psalms and Prophets ........................................................................... 101
John C. SOLHEID
Purity of Heart in Origen’s Psalm Homilies....................................... 111
VI Table of Contents
Daniel J. TOLAN
Origen’s Refutation of the Divine Ideas in Περὶ Ἀρχῶν II 3.6 as the
Emergence of ‘Neoplatonism’ ............................................................ 125
Jonathan H. YOUNG
“Between Human and Animal Souls”: The Resurrection of the
Rational Soul and Origen’s Transformation of Metensomatosis ....... 137
Shaily Shashikant PATEL

Magic and Morality: Origen of Alexandria and the Construction of
Christian ‘Miracle’ .............................................................................. 151
Abbreviations
AA.SS see ASS.

AAWG.PH Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen Philolo-
gisch-historische Klasse, Göttingen.
AB Analecta Bollandiana, Brussels.
AC Antike und Christentum, ed. F.J. Dölger, Münster.
ACL Antiquité classique, Louvain.
ACO Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum, ed. E. Schwartz, Berlin.
ACW Ancient Christian Writers, ed. J. Quasten and J.C. Plumpe, Westminster
(Md.)/London.
AHDLMA Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du moyen âge, Paris.
AJAH American Journal of Ancient History, Cambridge, Mass.
AJP American Journal of Philology, Baltimore.
AKK Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht, Mainz.
AKPAW Abhandlungen der königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissen-
schaften, Berlin.
ALMA Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi (Bulletin du Cange), Paris/Brussels.
ALW Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft, Regensburg.
AnalBoll Analecta Bollandiana, Brussels.
ANCL Ante-Nicene Christian Library, Edinburgh.
ANF Ante-Nicene Fathers, Buffalo/New York.
ANRW Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, ed H. Temporini et al.,
Berlin.
AnSt Anatolian Studies, London.
AnThA Année théologique augustinienne, Paris.
APOT Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, ed.
R.E. Charles, Oxford.
AR Archivum Romanicum, Florence.
ARW Archiv für Religionswissenschaft, Berlin/Leipzig.
ASS Acta Sanctorum, ed. the Bollandists, Brussels.
AThANT Abhandlungen zur Theologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments, Zürich.
Aug Augustinianum, Rome.
AugSt Augustinian Studies, Villanova (USA).
AW Athanasius Werke, ed. H.-G. Opitz et al., Berlin.
AZ Archäologische Zeitung, Berlin.
BA Bibliothèque augustinienne, Paris.
BAC Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, Madrid.
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, New Haven, Conn.
BDAG A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian
Literature, 3rd edn F.W. Danker, Chicago.
BEHE Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études, Paris.
BETL Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, Louvain.
BGL Benediktinisches Geistesleben, St. Ottilien.
BHG Bibliotheca Hagiographica Graeca, Brussels.
BHL Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina Antiquae et Mediae Aetatis, Brussels.
VIII Abbreviations
BHO Bibliotheca Hagiographica Orientalis, Brussels.

BHTh Beiträge zur historischen Theologie, Tübingen.
BJ Bursians Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der klassischen Altertums-
wissenschaft, Leipzig.
BJRULM Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, Manchester.
BKV Bibliothek der Kirchenväter, ed. F.X. Reithmayr and V. Thalhofer,
Kempten.
BKV2 Bibliothek der Kirchenväter, ed. O. Bardenhewer, Th. Schermann, and
C. Weyman, Kempten/Munich.
BKV3 Bibliothek der Kirchenväter. Zweite Reihe, ed. O. Bardenhewer, J. Zel-
linger, and J. Martin, Munich.
BLE Bulletin de littérature ecclésiastique, Toulouse.
BoJ Bonner Jahrbücher, Bonn.
BS Bibliotheca sacra, London.
BSL Bolletino di studi latini, Naples.
BWAT Beiträge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten Testament, Leipzig/Stuttgart.
Byz Byzantion, Leuven.
BZ Byzantinische Zeitschrift, Leipzig.
BZNW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, Berlin.
CAr Cahiers Archéologique, Paris.
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Washington.
CChr.CM Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Mediaevalis, Turnhout/Paris.
CChr.SA Corpus Christianorum, Series Apocryphorum, Turnhout/Paris.
CChr.SG Corpus Christianorum, Series Graeca, Turnhout/Paris.
CChr.SL Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, Turnhout/Paris.
CH Church History, Chicago.
CIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Berlin.
CP(h) Classical Philology, Chicago.
CPG Clavis Patrum Graecorum, ed. M. Geerard, vols. I-VI, Turnhout.
CPL Clavis Patrum Latinorum (SE 3), ed. E. Dekkers and A. Gaar, Turnhout.
CQ Classical Quarterly, London/Oxford.
CR The Classical Review, London/Oxford.
CSCO Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, Louvain.
Aeth = Scriptores Aethiopici
Ar = Scriptores Arabici
Arm = Scriptores Armeniaci
Copt = Scriptores Coptici
Iber = Scriptores Iberici
Syr = Scriptores Syri
Subs = Subsidia
CSEL Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, Vienna.
CSHB Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae, Bonn.
CTh Collectanea Theologica, Lvov.
CUF Collection des Universités de France publiée sous le patronage de l’Asso-
ciation Guillaume Budé, Paris.
CW Catholic World, New York.
DAC Dictionary of the Apostolic Church, ed. J. Hastings, Edinburgh.
Abbreviations IX
DACL see DAL

DAL Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, ed. F. Cabrol,
H. Leclercq, Paris.
DB Dictionnaire de la Bible, Paris.
DBS Dictionnaire de la Bible, Supplément, Paris.
DCB Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines, ed.
W. Smith and H. Wace, 4 vols, London.
DHGE Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastique, ed. A. Baudrillart,
Paris.
Did Didaskalia, Lisbon.
DOP Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Cambridge, Mass., subsequently Washing-
ton, D.C.
DOS Dumbarton Oaks Studies, Cambridge, Mass., subsequently Washing-
ton, D.C.
DR Downside Review, Stratton on the Fosse, Bath.
DS H.J. Denzinger and A. Schönmetzer, ed., Enchiridion Symbolorum,
Barcelona/Freiburg i.B./Rome.
DSp Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed. M. Viller, S.J., and others, Paris.
DTC Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, ed. A. Vacant, E. Mangenot, and
E. Amann, Paris.
EA Études augustiniennes, Paris.
ECatt Enciclopedia Cattolica, Rome.
ECQ Eastern Churches Quarterly, Ramsgate.
EE Estudios eclesiasticos, Madrid.
EECh Encyclopedia of the Early Church, ed. A. Di Berardino, Cambridge.
EKK Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament, Neukirchen.
EH Enchiridion Fontium Historiae Ecclesiasticae Antiquae, ed. Ueding-Kirch,
6th ed., Barcelona.
EO Échos d’Orient, Paris.
EtByz Études Byzantines, Paris.
ETL Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, Louvain.
EWNT Exegetisches Wörterbuch zum NT, ed. H.R. Balz et al., Stuttgart.
ExpT The Expository Times, Edinburgh.
FC The Fathers of the Church, New York.
FGH Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, Berlin.
FKDG Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte, Göttingen.
FRL Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments,
Göttingen.
FS Festschrift.
FThSt Freiburger theologische Studien, Freiburg i.B.
FTS Frankfurter theologische Studien, Frankfurt a.M.
FZThPh Freiburger Zeitschrift für Theologie und Philosophie, Freiburg/Switzerland.
GCS Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller, Leipzig/Berlin.
GDV Geschichtsschreiber der deutschen Vorzeit, Stuttgart.
GLNT Grande Lessico del Nuovo Testamento, Genoa.
GNO Gregorii Nysseni Opera, Leiden.
GRBS Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, Cambridge, Mass.
X Abbreviations
GWV Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, Offenburg.

HbNT Handbuch zum Neuen Testament. Tübingen.
HDR Harvard Dissertations in Religion, Missoula.
HJG Historisches Jahrbuch der Görresgesellschaft, successively Munich,
Cologne and Munich/Freiburg i.B.
HKG Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte, Tübingen.
HNT Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, Tübingen.
HO Handbuch der Orientalistik, Leiden.
HSCP Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, Cambridge, Mass.
HTR Harvard Theological Review, Cambridge, Mass.
HTS Harvard Theological Studies, Cambridge, Mass.
HZ Historische Zeitschrift, Munich/Berlin.
ICC The International Critical Commentary of the Holy Scriptures of the Old
and New Testaments, Edinburgh.
ILCV Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae Veteres, ed. E. Diehl, Berlin.
ILS Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae, ed. H. Dessau, Berlin.
J(b)AC Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, Münster.
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature, Philadelphia, Pa., then various places.
JdI Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Berlin.
JECS Journal of Early Christian Studies, Baltimore.
JEH The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, London.
JJS Journal of Jewish Studies, London.
JLH Jahrbuch für Liturgik und Hymnologie, Kassel.
JPTh Jahrbücher für protestantische Theologie, Leipzig/Freiburg i.B.
JQR Jewish Quarterly Review, Philadelphia.
JRS Journal of Roman Studies, London.
JSJ Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman
Period, Leiden.
JSOR Journal of the Society of Oriental Research, Chicago.
JTS Journal of Theological Studies, Oxford.
KAV Kommentar zu den apostolischen Vätern, Göttingen.
KeTh Kerk en Theologie, ’s Gravenhage.
KJ(b) Kirchliches Jahrbuch für die evangelische Kirche in Deutschland, Güters-
loh.
LCL The Loeb Classical Library, London/Cambridge, Mass.
LNPF A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian
Church, ed. P. Schaff and H. Wace, Buffalo/New York.
L(O)F Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Oxford.
LSJ H.G. Liddell and R. Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, new (9th) edn
H.S. Jones, Oxford.
LThK Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, Freiburg i.B.
LXX Septuagint.
MA Moyen-Âge, Brussels.
MAMA Monumenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua, London.
Mansi J.D. Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, Florence,
1759-1798. Reprint and continuation: Paris/Leipzig, 1901-1927.
MBTh Münsterische Beiträge zur Theologie, Münster.
Abbreviations XI
MCom Miscelanea Comillas, Comillas/Santander.

MGH Monumenta germaniae historica. Hanover/Berlin.
ML Mediaevalia Lovaniensia, Louvain.
MPG See PG.
MSR Mélanges de science religieuse, Lille.
MThZ Münchener theologische Zeitschrift, Munich.
Mus Le Muséon, Louvain.
NA28 Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th edition, Stuttgart.
NGWG Nachrichten der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen.
NH(M)S Nag Hammadi (and Manichaean) Studies, Leiden.
NIV New International Version.
NKJV New King James Version.
NovTest Novum Testamentum, Leiden.
NPNF See LNPF.
NRSV New Revised Standard Version.
NRTh Nouvelle Revue Théologique, Tournai/Louvain/Paris.
NTA Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen, Münster.
NT.S Novum Testamentum Supplements, Leiden.
NTS New Testament Studies, Cambridge/Washington.
NTTSD New Testament Tools, Studies and Documents, Leiden/Boston.
OBO Orbis biblicus et orientalis, Freiburg, Switz., then Louvain.
OCA Orientalia Christiana Analecta, Rome.
OCP Orientalia Christiana Periodica, Rome.
OECS Oxford Early Christian Studies, Oxford.
OLA Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, Louvain.
OLP Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica, Louvain.
Or Orientalia. Commentarii editi a Pontificio Instituto Biblico, Rome.
OrChr Oriens Christianus, Leipzig, then Wiesbaden.
OrSyr L’Orient Syrien, Paris.
PG Migne, Patrologia, series graeca.
PGL A Patristic Greek Lexicon, ed. G.L. Lampe, Oxford.
PL Migne, Patrologia, series latina.
PLRE The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, ed. A.H.M. Jones et al.,
Cambridge.
PLS Migne, Patrologia, series latina. Supplementum ed. A. Hamman.
PO Patrologia Orientalis, Paris.
PRE Paulys Realenzyklopädie der classischen Alterthumswissenschaft, Stuttgart.
PS Patrologia Syriaca, Paris.
PTA Papyrologische Texte und Abhandlungen, Bonn.
PThR Princeton Theological Review, Princeton.
PTS Patristische Texte und Studien, Berlin.
PW Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, ed.
G. Wissowa, Stuttgart.
QLP Questions liturgiques et paroissiales, Louvain.
QuLi Questions liturgiques, Louvain.
RAC Rivista di Archeologia Cristiana, Rome.
RACh Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum, Stuttgart.
XII Abbreviations
RAM Revue d’ascétique et de mystique, Paris.

RAug Recherches Augustiniennes, Paris.
RBen Revue Bénédictine, Maredsous.
RB(ibl) Revue biblique, Paris.
RE Realencyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche, founded by
J.J. Herzog, 3e ed. A. Hauck, Leipzig.
REA(ug) Revue des études Augustiniennes, Paris.
REB Revue des études byzantines, Paris.
RED Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta, Rome.
RÉL Revue des études latines, Paris.
REG Revue des études grecques, Paris.
RevSR Revue des sciences religieuses, Strasbourg.
RevThom Revue thomiste, Toulouse.
RFIC Rivista di filologia e d’istruzione classica, Turin.
RGG Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, ed. Gunkel-Zscharnack, Tübingen
RHE Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique, Louvain.
RhMus Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, Bonn.
RHR Revue de l’histoire des religions, Paris.
RHT Revue d’Histoire des Textes, Paris.
RMAL Revue du Moyen-Âge Latin, Paris.
ROC Revue de l’Orient chrétien, Paris.
RPh Revue de philologie, Paris.
RQ Römische Quartalschrift, Freiburg i.B.
RQH Revue des questions historiques, Paris.
RSLR Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa, Florence.
RSPT, RSPh Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques, Paris.
RSR Recherches de science religieuse, Paris.
RTAM Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale, Louvain.
RthL Revue théologique de Louvain, Louvain.
RTM Rivista di teologia morale, Bologna.
Sal Salesianum, Roma.
SBA Schweizerische Beiträge zur Altertumswissenschaft, Basel.
SBS Stuttgarter Bibelstudien, Stuttgart.
ScEc Sciences ecclésiastiques, Bruges.
SCh, SC Sources chrétiennes, Paris.
SD Studies and Documents, ed. K. Lake and S. Lake. London/Philadelphia.
SE Sacris Erudiri, Bruges.
SDHI Studia et documenta historiae et iuris, Roma.
SH Subsidia Hagiographica, Brussels.
SHA Scriptores Historiae Augustae.
SJMS Speculum. Journal of Mediaeval Studies, Cambridge, Mass.
SM Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktinerordens und
seiner Zweige, Munich.
SO Symbolae Osloenses, Oslo.
SP Studia Patristica, successively Berlin, Kalamazoo, Leuven.
SPM Stromata Patristica et Mediaevalia, ed. C. Mohrmann and J. Quasten,
Utrecht.
Abbreviations XIII
SQ Sammlung ausgewählter Quellenschriften zur Kirchen- und Dogmenge-

schichte, Tübingen.
SQAW Schriften und Quellen der Alten Welt, Berlin.
SSL Spicilegium Sacrum Lovaniense, Louvain.
StudMed Studi Medievali, Turin.
SVigChr Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae, Leiden.
SVF Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, ed. J. von Arnim, Leipzig.
TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Grand Rapids, Mich.
TE Teologia espiritual, Valencia.
ThGl Theologie und Glaube, Paderborn.
ThJ Theologische Jahrbücher, Leipzig.
ThLZ Theologische Literaturzeitung, Leipzig.
ThPh Theologie und Philosophie, Freiburg i.B.
ThQ Theologische Quartalschrift, Tübingen.
ThR Theologische Rundschau, Tübingen.
ThWAT Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament, Stuttgart.
ThWNT Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, Stuttgart.
ThZ Theologische Zeitschrift, Basel.
TLG Thesaurus Linguae Graecae.
TP Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association,
Lancaster, Pa.
TRE Theologische Realenzyklopädie, Berlin.
TS Theological Studies, New York and various places; now Washington, DC.
TThZ Trierer theologische Zeitschrift, Trier.
TU Texte und Untersuchungen, Leipzig/Berlin.
USQR Union Seminary Quarterly Review, New York.
VC Vigiliae Christianae, Amsterdam.
VetChr Vetera Christianorum, Bari (Italy).
VT Vetus Testamentum, Leiden.
WBC Word Biblical Commentary, Waco.
WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, Tübingen.
WZKM Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, Vienna.
YUP Yale University Press, New Haven.
ZAC Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum, Berlin.
ZAM Zeitschrift für Aszese und Mystik, Innsbruck, then Würzburg.
ZAW Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, Giessen, then Berlin.
ZDPV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins, Leipzig.
ZKG Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, Gotha, then Stuttgart.
ZKTh Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie, Vienna.
ZNW Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der
älteren Kirche, Giessen, then Berlin.
ZRG Zeitschrift für Rechtsgeschichte, Weimar.
ZThK Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche, Tübingen.
The Pagan Gregory and Origen:
Polemics and Apologetics in the School of Caesarea
Constantin-Ionuț MIHAI, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Iași, Romania
ABSTRACT
According to his own testimony, the author of the Oratio Panegyrica in Origenem
– traditionally identified with Gregory Thaumaturgus – was born to a wealthy pagan
family and received an education in rhetoric, Latin language, and Roman law. Around
233 AD, he joined Origen’s school in Caesarea, where he spent five to eight years
studying Greek philosophy and Christian theology. In this article, I pursue two aims.
The first one is to examine what the young Gregory knew of Christianity when he
joined Origen’s school. I will argue that he shared some of the prejudices of his pagan
contemporaries concerning the Christian faith and, in his discussions with Origen, made
frequent appeal to arguments commonly used in pagan polemics against Christianity.
Like other pagan intellectuals of his time, Gregory-the-student criticized the simple
style of the Christian scriptures and rejected them as hardly credible or even despicable.
The second aim is to emphasize the apologetic tendencies of the school of Caesarea.
To reach this aim, I will show how Origen’s activity did not have only didactic, but also
apologetic purposes. There is evidence that Origen had to face and respond to criticism
against Christianity raised by the young Gregory and, probably, by other pagan intellectu-
als of his time. A thorough analysis of certain passages from the Oratio, where Gregory
mentions the apologetic arguments and strategies Origen made use of, speaks in favor of
this idea. Taking this into account, the Oratio itself can be read as a piece of third-century
apologetic literature.
Both the manuscript tradition and the early Christian historiography assign
the Oratio Panegyrica in Origenem to Gregory Thaumaturgus, a student of
Origen in Caesarea of Palestine and future bishop of Neocaesarea in Pontus.
The Oratio was delivered around 238 AD, when the young Gregory left
Origen’s school to return to his native land.1 The text is of great importance for
the study of early Christianity as it contains not only the most extensive description
1
Acknowledgment: This article was funded by the Romanian Ministry of Research and Innova-
tion within Program 1 – Development of the National RD System, Subprogram 1.2 – Institutional
Performance – RDI excellence funding projects, Contract no. 34PFE/19.10.2018.
See Eusebius, HE VI 30; Jerome, Vir. ill. 65. Pierre Nautin, Origène: sa vie et son œuvre,
Christianisme antique 1 (Paris, 1977), contested the ascription of the Oratio to Gregory Thauma-
turgus, but his arguments have found little support among scholars. For an accurate and helpful
Studia Patristica CXI, 1-9.

© Peeters Publishers, 2021.
2 C.-I. MIHAI
of Origen’s teaching activity, but also substantial information about Gregory’s

youth.
In an interesting and valuable autobiographical account, Gregory says that
he was born to a wealthy family and was brought up as a pagan, following the
‘misguided customs’ of his native land (πάτρια ἔθη τὰ πεπλανημένα, § 48).2
According to his testimony, before traveling to Caesarea and entering Origen’s
school, he received an education in grammar, rhetoric, Latin language, and
Roman law (§§ 56-60). Gregory also mentions that at the age of fourteen he
lost his father, a man who lived in fear of the old gods (δεισιδαίμονος, § 48).
Of particular interest is Gregory’s report that the death of his father started him
‘on the road to knowing the truth’ (ἀρχὴ τῆς τοῦ ἀληθοῦς ἐπιγνώσεως ἦν,
§ 49), for, he says, ‘at that point for the first time I was turned over to the saving
and true Word’ (ἐπὶ τὸν σωτήριον καὶ ἀληθῆ μετετέθην λόγον, § 50). From
that point on, he adds, ‘this holy Word immediately began to dwell with me’
(ἐξ ἐκείνου πως ἐπιδημεῖν μέν μοι ὁ ἱερὸς ὅδε λόγος ἤρξατο εὐθύς, ibid.),
even if all this happened ‘more under a sort of compulsion’ than of his own accord
(κατηναγκασμένος μᾶλλον ἤπερ ἑκών, ibid.).
Upon closer examination, Gregory’s account of his first encounter with the
‘holy Logos’ is elusive and ambiguous. The author does not tell us how he
encountered the Logos, or what exactly this ‘encounter’ amounted to. Moreover,
in the same autobiographical section, Gregory mentions that his soul did not
yet belong to the divine and pure Word (§ 53), and later in the Oratio he even
says that it was Origen who first prepared him to accept the words of truth
(παρεσκευάσατο εἰς παραδοχὴν τῶν τῆς ἀληθείας λόγων, § 98). The ambigu-
ity of Gregory’s account can also be blamed on the polysemy of the Greek term
λόγος, which, at least in some of the passages under discussion here, may refer
to human reason. As he notes, the encounter with the ‘holy Logos’ happened
‘at the very point when the reason common to all comes to maturity’ (οἷα δὴ
ἄρτι πληρουμένου τοῦ κοινοῦ πάντων ἀνθρώπων λόγου, § 50), so that ‘both
the human and the divine reason began in me at the same time (ὁμοῦ ὅ τε
ἀνθρώπινος καὶ ὁ θεῖος ἄρξηται ἐν ἐμοὶ λόγος), the latter coming to my aid
by that power which I cannot describe but which is proper to it, the former
receiving its aid’ (§ 53). As Gregory concludes, all this happened so that the
holy Word would not be transmitted in vain ‘to a soul not yet reasonable, but
to one which had become reasonable already’ (§§ 52-3).
Gregory’s description of his youthful attainment of the logos, human and
divine, has been the subject of much debate in the scholarly literature. It is still
overview of this issue, see Francesco Celia, ‘Gregory of Neocaesarea: A Re-examination of the
Biographical Issue’, Adamantius 22 (2016), 171-93.
2
All references to Gregory’s text follow Henri Crouzel’s edition, Grégoire le Thaumaturge:
Remerciement à Origène suivi de la Lettre d’Origène à Grégoire, SC 148 (Paris, 1969), while the
translated passages are taken from Michael Slusser, St. Gregory Thaumaturgus: Life and Works,
FC 98 (Washington, 1998).
The Pagan Gregory and Origen 3
a matter of controversy whether the young Gregory was already committed to

the Christian faith when he first met Origen, or whether he was a pagan without
any real interest in the Christian religion and theology. As early as 1928, Aimé
Puech claimed, unfortunately without any supporting evidence, that Gregory’s
mother was a Christian, and maintained that the author converted to Christian-
ity soon after his father’s death.3 As expected, Puech’s opinion has found little
support among scholars. In his 1968 article, ‘Das Anliegen der Schule des
Origenes zu Cäsarea’, Adolf Knauber argued that the young Gregory belonged
to the educated pagan elite of the Roman Empire, and was unbaptized when he
entered, as well as when he left, Origen’s school.4 Knauber’s view has been
partially criticized by Crouzel, who maintained that ‘Gregory’s first contact
with Christianity occurred at the age of fourteen’, though he thought it possible
that Gregory might not have been baptized when he travelled to Caesarea.5
A more radical view has been expressed by Laurent Pernot, who claimed that
‘l’homme Grégoire s’était converti au christianisme à l’âge de quatorze ans’,6
while Eugenio Marotta preferred to speak of an ‘interior conversion’ of the
young Gregory.7 More cautiously, Michael Slusser has argued that the para-
graphs 49-53 of the Oratio ‘could refer either to the attainment of full use of
reason or to some connection with Christianity’,8 and a similar point has been
made, more recently, by David Satran, who thinks that in the passages under
discussion ‘the reception of logos is to be understood as a sign of intellectual
maturity, the biological attainment of the process of reason, or as a deeper
indication of an internal conversion or an actual entry into the Christian faith
through baptism’.9 To conclude, in his recent monograph dedicated to Gregory’s
life and works, Franceso Celia argues that in paragraphs 49-53 ‘Gregory is
reinterpreting his past on the basis of his later conversion, which was at the
3
Aimé Puech, Histoire de la littérature grecque chrétienne, depuis les origines jusqu’à la fin
du IVe siècle, vol. 2 (Paris, 1928), 490.
4
Adolf Knauber, ‘Das Anliegen der Schule des Origenes zu Cäsarea’, MThZ 19 (1968), 182-203.
A similar point has been made by Clementina Mazzucco, ‘La componente autobiografica nel
Discorso di ringraziamento attribuito a Gregorio il Taumaturgo’, in Benedetto Clausi and Vincenza
Milano (eds), Il giusto che fiorisce come palma. Gregorio il Taumaturgo fra storia e agiografia,
Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum 104 (Roma, 2007), 101-38, 124.
5
Henri Crouzel, Origen: The Life and Thought of the First Great Theologian, translated by
S.S. Worrall (San Francisco, 1989), 25. See also Stephen Mitchell, ‘The Life and Lives of Gregory
Thaumaturgus’, in Jan Willem Drijvers and John W. Watt (eds), Portraits of Spiritual Authority:
Religious Power in Early Christianity, Byzantium and the Christian Orient (Leiden, Boston, Köln,
1999), 99-138, 101.
6
Laurent Pernot, La rhétorique de l’éloge dans le monde gréco-romain, vol. 2 (Paris, 1993), 789.
7
Eugenio Marotta, Gregorio il Taumaturgo: Discorso a Origene. Una pagina di pedagogia
cristiana, Collana di Testi Patristici 40 (Roma, 1983), 59, n. 32: ‘La conversione di Gregorio fu
interiore’.
8
M. Slusser, St. Gregory Thaumaturgus: Life and Works (1998), 99, n. 20.
9
David Satran, In the Image of Origen: Eros, Virtue, and Constraint in the Early Christian
Academy, Transformation of the Classical Heritage 58 (Oakland, 2018), 182, n. 4.
4 C.-I. MIHAI
same time philosophical and religious, in the light of Origen’s teachings’. 10

According to Celia, ‘Gregory’s words show that he went through the catechu-
menate at a later stage, but not that he was baptized at the age of fourteen’.11
As the above discussion already suggests, the long-standing question regard-
ing Gregory’s conversion to Christianity is far from being settled. Broadly
speaking, scholars divide into two main groups: those who presume an early
conversion of Gregory to Christianity (when he was about fourteen), and those
who argue that the conversion took place much later, when Gregory joined
Origen’s school. In what follows, I do not purport to offer any definite answer
to this question, but simply to readdress it in the light of the information provided
by the author himself in his address to Origen. Despite its great importance and
significance for reconstructing the portrait of the young Gregory, the autobio-
graphical account found in the Oratio has not yet received its due attention.
Several passages describing Gregory’s approach to the Christian faith have
been largely neglected or only occasionally discussed in the scholarly literature
so far. Taking some further steps in this direction, I will try to show how a more
thorough reading of the Oratio can illuminate Gregory’s attitude towards
Christians and the Christian religion at the time when he first met Origen. Such
an approach not only provides a deeper insight into Gregory’s mind and per-
sonality, but also sheds new light on some particular aspects of Origen’s school
in Caesarea. As I will argue below, Origen’s teaching activity had not only
didactic, but also apologetic aims.
Although I do not totally reject the possibility that Gregory might have had
some knowledge of Christianity before his encounter with Origen, I think that
the description provided in paragraphs 49-53 of the Oratio, which I referred
to above, can hardly be taken as a testimony of an early conversion to Chris-
tianity, as Puech, Pernot, and other scholars have thought. As we have seen,
Gregory’s account is rather ambiguous and elusive, providing no concrete
information on how he encountered the ‘holy’ and ‘divine’ Logos. There is
little evidence to support the claim that Gregory was already a Christian when
he joined Origen’s school. On the contrary, there is much evidence that, like many
other pagan intellectuals of his time, he manifested an attitude of contempt and
10
Francesco Celia, Preaching the Gospel to the Hellenes: The Life and Works of Gregory the
Wonderworker, PhD Thesis (Vrije Universiteit, 2017), 35. The thesis was recently published with
the same title by Peeters, Late Antique History and Religion 20 (Leuven, 2019).
11
Ibid. A similar point has been made by Marco Rizzi, Gregorio il Taumaturgo (?), Encomio
di Origene, Letture Cristiane del Primo Millennio 33 (Milano, 2002), 129, n. 21. Rizzi, ibid. 81-5,
deems the ascription of the Oratio to Gregory Thaumaturgus a still open question and argues that,
due to its literary and rhetorical specificities, the text is not entirely reliable for extracting biographical
elements concerning Gregory’s youth. Commenting on the same autobiographical sections found
in the Oratio, Winrich Löhr, ‘Christianity as Philosophy: Problems and Perspectives of an Ancient
Intellectual Project’, VC 64 (2010), 160-88, 162, notes that Gregory was ‘a young man still uncertain
of his future (…), not much different from other young men of the educated elite who had the time
and the money to add the study of philosophy to their education in rhetoric’.
ridicule towards the Christian religion and its doctrines, as we shall see in what
follows.
A couple of passages in the Oratio can help us grasp more clearly what
the young Gregory thought of Christianity at the time when he traveled to
Caesarea. According to his testimony, he was captivated by the philosophical
opinions which were attractive and impressive at first sight (ἔνδοξα αὐτόθεν
καὶ σεμνοειδῆ), and which had entered his ears as true (ὡς ἀληθῆ), under the
guise of elegant words (ὑπὸ εὐσχήμοσι ταῖς φωναῖς, § 103). Conversely, he
was quite disappointed by the simple style of the Jewish and Christian writings
and rejected them as hardly credible or even despicable. As he notes, since the
Christian doctrines were not expressed in a language that made them appear
attractive, they seemed ‘against reason and most unbelievable’ (παράδοξα καὶ
πάντων ἀπιστότατα, § 104). Writing with hindsight, he admits that they were
‘sound and trustworthy’, with nothing boastful in them, but, at the time he
encountered Origen, he rejected these doctrines as false (ὡς ψευδῆ) and unde-
servedly despised them’ (ὑβρισθέντα ἀναξίως, § 104).
The passages just quoted provide a portrait of Gregory-the-student as oppo-
nent and critic of Christianity. There is evidence in the Oratio that Gregory’s
experience in the school of Caesarea included a period of resistance to, and
criticism against, Origen’s teaching. As he recounts, he often contradicted
(ἀντιλεγόντων πολλάκις, 102) what his teacher said, even if it was true, doubt-
ing and mocking the Christian scriptures for their plain and simple language.
It is important to note here that Gregory’s attitude is in many respects similar to
that of other pagan intellectuals of his time. Some decades earlier, Celsus thought
of the Jewish and Christian scriptures as being ‘utterly crude and illiterate’
(ἁπλούστατα καὶ ἰδιωτικά),12 and argued that the doctrines taught by Jewish
and Christian writers have been better expressed among the Greeks.13
It was only through Origen’s teaching that Gregory (and, probably, other
students in the school of Caesarea) came to a proper understanding of the Chris-
tian scriptures. According to Gregory’s account, Origen showed his students
how ridiculously easily they had been misled and how rashly they appealed to
illegitimate arguments (§ 103). He helped them understand that most of the
philosophical doctrines, while attractive and impressive at first sight, were, in fact,
unsound and unworthy of credence (σαθρὰ καὶ οὐκ ἀξιόπιστα), ‘poor counter-
feits of the truth’ (§ 103). It was Origen who proved these doctrines to be rotten
and deceptive, stressing instead the value and reliability of the Christian ones.
12
Origen, CC IV 87; Marcel Borret (ed.), Origène: Contre Celse, 5 vol. (Paris, 1967-1976).
See ibid. III 68: ‘the doctrines which Celsus calls vulgar (ἰδιωτικοὶ λόγοι)’; III 73: ‘After this,
he again pours abuse on the man who teaches Christian doctrine and asserts of him that he expounds
ludicrous opinions (καταγέλαστα)’. Translations are taken from Henry Chadwick, Origen: Contra
Celsum (London, New York, 1980).
13
Ibid. VI 1. To Celsus, the divine scriptures are nothing more than ‘utter trash’ (λῆρος,
CC VI 50).
6 C.-I. MIHAI
This way, Gregory notes, ‘to those who worked them out and understood
exactly what they meant, what previously had been deemed worthless and dis-
reputable were understood to be the truest things of all and simply irresistible’.14
The passages under discussion here are important as they not only allow us
to recover Gregory’s initial attitude towards Christianity, but also offer a portrait
of Origen as a Christian teacher and apologist. Faced with Gregory’s reluctance
and criticism against Christianity, Origen had to defend the Christian scriptures
and counter the arguments of his opponent.
It is now time to ask whether, or to what extent, the discussion in the Ora-
tio conveys Origen’s own view on the language and style of the Christian
doctrines, in relation with Greek philosophical texts. Does the polemical and
apologetic situation described in the Oratio reflect Origen’s approach to this
topic as documented in his surviving works? If we take a close look, we see
that Gregory’s report on Origen’s apologetic arguments and strategies is in line
with what we find in Origen’s writings, especially in his apologetic treatise
Contra Celsum, written about ten years later than the Oratio. In several pas-
sages of his work, Origen deals with the same topic, ‘in reply to the criticism
of Celsus and others that the scriptures have a mean style, which appears to be
put in the shade by the brilliance of a literary composition’.15 Already in the
Preface of his book, Origen announces that he will engage himself in a contest
against the impressive philosophical doctrines ‘which are convincing to most
people, but which present as truth what is untrue’.16 In a way which reminds
us of the situation described in Gregory’s Oratio, Origen condemns the ‘great-
ness apparent in the theories of the wisdom of the world’ (Praef. 5), and argues
that Moses was far superior to the wise poets and philosophers of the Greeks
(ibid. I 18).
However, it was not only in the Contra Celsum that Origen dealt with this
issue, but also in his De principiis, written when he was still in Alexandria,17
as well as in his Homilies on Joshua and Homilies on Ezekiel, which may have
been given at a time not too long after Gregory’s farewell speech. In several
passages of these homilies, Origen denounces the ‘elegance of words’ and the
14
Joseph W. Trigg, ‘God’s Marvelous Oikonomia: Reflections of Origen’s Understanding of
Divine and Human Pedagogy in the Address Ascribed to Gregory Thaumaturgus’, JECS 9 (2001),
27-52, 46, discusses the same passage, but he understands it in a totally different way, as it would
describe a method by which Origen tried to help his students develop their own critical sense.
According to Trigg, Origen was ‘deliberately concealing his opinions’ and ‘would often present
doctrines he considered sound in an offhand way and those he considered specious with seriousness,
only revealing his actual opinion after his students had grappled with them’.
15
CC VI, 2 (Chadwick’s translation; see above, n. 12). See also ibid. I 62; III 39; VII 59.
16
Ibid., Praef. 5.
17
De princ. IV 1, 7: ‘the treasure of divine wisdom is hidden in the paltry and inelegant vessels
of words’; John Behr (ed. and trans.), Origen: On First Principles, vol. 2, Oxford Early Christian
Texts (Oxford, 2017), 479.
‘beauty of the discourses of the philosophers’, warning against ‘the splendor of

the performance’ which may ‘beguile the hearer and seize him’.18
In light of the discussion above, it can be argued that Gregory’s description
of Origen’s apologetic strategies reflects, at least partially, Origen’s own
apologetic approach as documented in his surviving works. Forced to respond
to the critiques mounted against Christianity by young educated pagans like
Gregory, who regarded the Christian doctrines as unbelievable and worthy of
contempt, Origen presumably made use of apologetic arguments similar to
those attested in his works. It is thus important to note that the Oratio provides
not only a description of Origen’s teaching activity in the school of Caesarea,
but also an insight into the apologetic arguments and strategies Origen used to
defend Christianity against the objections raised by some of his students.
Before concluding this short analysis, it would be fruitful to investigate a
little further the significance of Gregory’s description of his youthful prejudices
against the Christian scriptures and doctrines. What purpose was this autobio-
graphical account intended to serve? Without denying the legitimacy of other
possible answers, I think that the apologetic situation described in the Oratio
can be better understood if we place it in the context of the anti-Christian
polemic of the second and early third century. By discussing the literary value
of the Christian scriptures, Gregory intended to respond, at least indirectly, to
one of the main objections made against Christians by their pagan opponents.
From this perspective, it is not only Origen who appears as a Christian apolo-
gist, but also Gregory himself seems to have assumed, at the time he wrote and
delivered the Oratio, certain apologetic aims. It seems likely that Gregory
directly tackled the issue of the simple style of the Christian scriptures in order
to respond to the accusations and mockeries made by some pagan intellectuals
of his time.
It is thus important to note how the situation described by Gregory connects
the Oratio with some apologetic texts from the second and early third century.
Apart from Origen’s Contra Celsum, which I referred to above, thematic and
18
HIos VII, 7; Cynthia White (ed.), Origen: Homilies on Joshua, translated by Barbara J. Bruce,
FC 105 (Washington, 2002), 82-3: ‘There is much elegance in words and much beauty in the
discourses of philosophers and rhetoricians, who are all of the city of Jericho, that is, people of
this word. If, therefore, you should find among the philosophers perverse doctrines beautified by
the assertions of a splendid discourse, this is the “tongue of gold”. But beware that the splendor
of the performance does not beguile you, that the beauty of the golden discourse not seize you.
Remember that Jesus commanded all the gold found in Jericho to be anathema’. HEz III, 3;
Thomas P. Scheck (ed.), Origen: Homilies 1-14 on Ezekiel, ACW 62 (New York, 2010), 57:
‘Effeminate indeed are the souls and wills of their teachers, who are ever putting together fine-
sounding and melodious speeches. Indeed, let me be perfectly honest: There is nothing manly,
nothing strong, nothing worthy of God, in the men who preach according to the pleasures and wishes
of their hearers’. For more references, see Adele Monaci Castagno, Origene predicatore e il suo
pubblico (Milano, 1987), 76, notes 50 and 51. See also Henri Crouzel, Origène et la philosophie
(Aubier, 1962), 125-33.
8 C.-I. MIHAI
linguistic parallels can be found, for instance, in Theophilus of Antioch, who,

in the last decades of the second century, complained that the pagan Autolycus
regarded ‘the word of truth as silly’ (λῆρον ἡγῇ τυγχάνειν τὸν λόγον τῆς
ἀληθείας).19 Like Gregory later, Theophilus invited his opponent to see the
nonsense of the pagan writings (ἐπιγνῷς δὲ τῶν λοιπῶν συνταξάντων τὴν
φλυαρίαν) by confronting them to the Jewish and Christian ones. As the Greek
apologist states, ‘what has been said by philosophers, historians, and poets is
thought to be trustworthy because of its embellished style, but what they say is
proved foolish and pointless by the abundance of their nonsense and the absence
of even the slightest measure of the truth in their writings’.20
Much like Theophilus and Origen, Gregory not only argued for the truth of
the Christian doctrines, but also denounced the arrogance and the sophistry of
the Greek philosophers. By dealing with this topic, Gregory simultaneously
tried to reject criticism and promote a positive assessment of the Christian
scriptures, using a rhetorical strategy attested in the works of Christian apolo-
getic literature. This can help us understand better the cultural context in which
Gregory delivered his speech, as well as the literary background he had in mind
when he wrote it. As we have seen, one of Gregory’s aims was to provide a brief
but instructive answer to the critiques mounted by his pagan neighbors, and it is
not unreasonable to suppose that the Oratio was intended to function as a sort
of indirect apology of Christianity.21
I hope that the discussion above has provided some small basis for a new,
more accurate, appraisal of what the young Gregory knew and thought of Chris-
tianity at the time he traveled to Caesarea. As I have argued, the Oratio gives
little evidence that Gregory was already committed to the Christian faith when
he joined Origen’s school.22 On the contrary, we found evidence that Gregory
19
Autol. III 1; Robert M. Grant (ed.), Theophilus of Antioch: Ad Autolycum, Oxford Early
Christian Texts (Oxford, 1970).
20
Ibid. II 12. For the ordinary language of the Jewish and Christian scriptures, see also Clement
of Alexandria, Strom. I 10, 48, 5; Jerome, Ep. 20, 30: Si quando in memet reversus prophetam
legere coepissem, sermo horrebat incultus. The same topic is discussed by Lactantius, Inst. V 1, 15-6;
Augustine, Conf. III 5, 9; Ps. Justin, Coh. Gr. 35, 1; Tatian, Oratio 29, 2. See also Minucius Felix,
Octavius 38, 6: non eloquimur magna sed vivimus.
21
See the points made by M. Rizzi, Gregorio il Taumaturgo (?), Encomio di Origene (2002),
33-5. Id., ‘Il significato politico dell’Oratio panegyrica in Origenem’, in Mario Girardi and Marcello
Marin (eds), Origene e l’alessandrinismo cappadoce (III-IV secolo). Atti del V Convegno del
Gruppo Italiano di Ricerca su Origene e la Tradizione Alessandrina: Bari, 20-22 settembre 2000,
Quaderni di Vetera Christianorum 28 (Bari, 2002), 49-72.
22
This view can also be supported by the information provided by Eusebius, HE VI 30, who
reports that the young Gregory (who, at that time, would have been called Theodore) and his
brother Athenodore ‘were strongly enamoured of Greek and Roman studies’. Eusebius also men-
tions that it was Origen who ‘instilled into them a passion for philosophy and urged them to
exchange their former love for the study of divine truth’ (Eusebius, The Ecclesiastical History,
vol. 2, with an English translation by J.E.L. Oulton, Loeb Classical Library [London, 1942], 81).
From Eusebius’ report, it appears, once more, that neither was the young Gregory a Christian
shared some of the widely spread prejudices against Christians, regarding with
distrust and even contempt their scriptures and doctrines. Closely related to
this, it is important to note that Origen’s school in Caesarea had strong apolo-
getic tendencies. As I have tried to argue, Origen’s relationship with students
like Gregory did not entail only a didactic, but also a polemical, apologetic
and, I would add, protreptic approach.23 The Oratio provides sufficient evi-
dence that Origen had to face and respond to the criticism raised against the
Christian religion by the young Gregory and, probably, by other pagan intel-
lectuals of his time. More important, however, is to note that, by emphasizing
Origen’s apologetic arguments and strategies, Gregory made manifest the
intent to endow his text with certain apologetic purposes. In light of this, the
Address itself can be read as a piece of third-century apologetic literature.
convert when he traveled to Caesarea, nor did his encounter with Origen lead him to a sudden
conversion to Christianity. His vacillation and desire to slip away when Origen started his teach-
ings (see Oratio § 78) can be another sign of his unacquaintance with, and reluctance against,
Christianity.
23
For more on this, see Olga Alieva, ‘Origen’s Protreptics to Philosophy: Testimony of Gregory
Thaumaturgus in the Oratio Panegyrica VI’, in Anders-Christian Jacobsen (ed.), Origeniana
Undecima: Origen and Origenism in the History of Western Thought (Leuven, 2016), 681-9.
Polymorphism and Protomorphism of the Word of God
in Origen’s Contra Celsum
Augustine M. REISENAUER, O.P., University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA
ABSTRACT
In his Contra Celsum, Origen intends his response to the pagan philosopher Celsus’
criticisms of Christianity to serve the particular benefit of those whose faith in Christ
is weak or even nonexistent. In providing an apologetic response for the benefit of such
persons, Origen takes their spiritual and intellectual competencies into sincere consid-
eration. Origen thus imitates and participates in the loving consideration that God’s
Word displays in sharing his divinity with all of humanity, and in accommodating
himself to the diverse spiritual and intellectual capabilities of various human persons.
Such loving consideration for everyone, including the least capable, not only by Christ,
but also by Christians, lends credibility to Christianity as the true doctrine. Origen
appreciates that God’s Word humbles himself, both in his incarnation in Jesus and in
his inscription in Scripture, and presents himself in a multiplicity of forms to differently
abled humans. This polymorphism of the incarnate and inscribed Word appears on three
distinct, but inseparable, levels of his divinity, his humanity, and his textuality. The Word
appears in many forms so that each human person can experience, to an appropriate
degree, the primary form of the loving God, and gradually be purified, strengthened,
and drawn up in love to the ultimate encounter of contemplating God in his most sublime
form. This paper explores Origen’s understanding of these two features of the polymor-
phism and protomorphism of the Word, and their structural relationship in the process
of encountering, interpreting, and uniting with God’s Word.
Introductory Overtures
In his Contra Celsum (Cels.)1 (ca. 244-249 AD),2 Origen (ca. 185-254 AD),
1
Greek texts cited in this article are from Origenes, Contra Celsum = Gegen Celsus, ed. Michael
Fiedrowicz, trans. Claudia Barthold, FC 50/1-5 (Freiburg im Breisgau, 2011-2012), with indications
of book and chapter(s) of Cels., followed in parentheses by FC volume, page(s), and line(s). English
translations, with some slight adjustments, are from Origen, Contra Celsum, trans. Henry Chadwick
(1953; repr., Cambridge, 1980). These Greek texts and English translations are provided in consul-
tation with Origène, Contre Celse, vols. 1-5, ed. Marcel Borret, SC 132, 136, 147, 150, 227 (Paris,
1967-1976). For a survey of recent studies on Cels., see Alain Le Boulluec, ‘Vingt ans de recherches
sur le Contre Celse: état des lieux’, in Lorenzo Perrone (ed.), Discorsi di verità: Paganesimo,
guidaismo e cristianesimo a confronto nel Contro Celso di Origene, SEAug 61 (Rome, 1998), 9-28.
2
For approximate dates of Cels., see M. Borret, critical introduction to Contre Celse, vol. 1,
SC 132 (1967), 15-21; Pierre Nautin, Origène: Sa vie et son œuvre, CAM 1 (Paris, 1977),

12 A.M. REISENAUER
at the request of his patron, Ambrose,3 offers an apologetic defense and theo-
logical construction that responds to criticisms of Christianity and accusations
against Christ that the pagan philosopher Celsus advances in his True Doctrine
(,ἀληθὴς λόγος‘)4 (ca. 177-180 AD).5 Origen intends his work to benefit,
not so much the firmly ‘faithful’ (πιστοῖς), who ought to remain undisturbed
by Celsus’ arguments, but rather those ‘entirely without experience of faith in
Christ’ (τέλεον ἀγεύστοις τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν πίστεως), or those who are ‘weak
in “faith”’ (Rom. 14:1) (ἀσθενοῦσιν ἐν „τῇ πίστει“).6 His envisaged benefi-
ciaries, however, cannot simply be identified with the more simple-minded
multitude, from whom Origen often distinguishes the more intelligent few. This
is because Origen not only addresses his apology throughout to the learned
Ambrose, but also hints at a more extensive audience, which includes both
simple and sophisticated persons, when he writes:
375-6; H. Chadwick, introduction to Contra Celsum (1980), xiv-xv; M. Fiedrowicz, introduction

to Gegen Celsus, FC 50/1 (2011), 9-10; Anders-Christian Jacobsen, Christ – The Teacher of
Salvation: A Study on Origen’s Christology and Soteriology, Adamantiana 6 (Münster, 2015),
40-1.
3
See Cels. P.1 (FC 50/1, 182.9-16); et passim.
4
Cels. P.4 (FC 50/1, 188.15-6); et passim. For commentary on Celsus’ True Doctrine, see
Horacio E. Lona, Die Wahre Lehre des Kelsos: Übersetzt und erklärt, KfA.E 1 (Freiburg im Breis-
gau, 2005).
5
For the conjectural identity of Celsus, his eclectic middle Platonism, and the contents and
conventional dates of his True Doctrine, see M. Borret, general introduction to Contre Celse, vol. 5,
SC 227 (1976), 9-140; H. Chadwick, introduction to Contra Celsum (1980), xvi-xxviii; R. Joseph
Hoffmann, introduction to Celsus, On the True Doctrine, trans. R. Joseph Hoffmann (New York,
1987), 29-44; Silke-Petra Bergjan, ‘Celsus the Epicurean? The Interpretation of an Argument in
Origen, Contra Celsum’, HThR 94.2 (2001), 179-204; H.E. Lona, Die Wahre Lehre des Kelsos
(2005), 20-57; Anders-Christian Jacobsen, ‘Apologetics in Origen’, in Anders-Christian Jacobsen
and Jörg Ulrich (eds), Three Greek Apologists = Drei griechische Apologeten: Origen, Eusebius,
and Athanasius = Origenes, Eusebius, und Athanasius, ECCA 3 (Frankfurt am Main, 2007), 16-21;
M. Fiedrowicz, introduction to Gegen Celsus, FC 50/1 (2011), 13-37. Alternatively, H.-U. Rosen-
baum argues for dating it almost two decades earlier, that is, shortly after 160 AD, in ‘Zur Datierung
von Celsus’ ΑΛΗΘΗΣ ΛΟΓΟΣ’, VigChr 26.2 (1972), 102-11. Following Rosenbaum, Michael
Frede presumes a date of ca. 175 AD in ‘Origen’s Treatise Against Celsus’, in Mark Edwards,
Martin Goodman and Simon Price (eds), Apologetics in the Roman Empire: Pagans, Jews, and
Christians (New York, 1999), 132.
6
Cels. P.6 (FC 50/1, 190.13-5). See also Cels. P.4 (FC 50/1, 188.1-16); 5.1 (FC 50/4, 870.4-
872.8). For treatments of the apologetic intentions, audience, and strategies of Cels., see Jean
Daniélou, Origen, trans. Walter Mitchell (New York, 1955), 99-127; M. Borret, critical introduc-
tion to Contre Celse, vol. 1, SC 132 (1967), 11-2, 38-51; M. Borret, general introduction to
Contre Celse, vol. 5, SC 227 (1976), 199-246; H. Chadwick, introduction to Contra Celsum
(1980), ix-xiii; M. Frede, ‘Origen’s Treatise’ (1999), 131-55; Lorenzo Perrone, ‘Fra silenzio e
parola: Dall’apologia alla testimonianza del cristianesimo nel Contro Celso di Origene’, in
L’apologétique chrétienne gréco-latine à l’époque prénicénienne, EnAC 51 (Geneva, 2005), 103-41;
A.-C. Jacobsen, ‘Apologetics in Origen’ (2007), 22-36; A.-C. Jacobsen, Christ – The Teacher of
Salvation (2015), 53-4.
Polymorphism and Protomorphism of the Word of God in Origen’s Contra Celsum 13
But as we think that some of those who are more capable of examining these problems
may read this book, let us take the risk and give an account of a few of the more profound
truths which have a mystical and secret conception7.
Although Origen, elsewhere in Cels., signals to deeper investigations, in his

other writings, that are more appropriate for more sophisticated Christians,8
even the sophisticated may be neither entirely immune from experiencing
moments of weakness in faith, especially when confronted by such pagans as
Celsus, nor entirely uninterested in having a reasoned defense for their hope.
The consideration that Origen takes of his audience’s various intellectual and
spiritual capacities for true doctrine does not merely display his love for each
human.9 It also reflects, imitates, and participates in the consideration of God
for all humans.10 For Origen, such loving consideration by Christ and by Chris-
tians for everyone, including the least capable, lends credibility to Christianity
as the true doctrine.
According to the contents of his Christian faith, Origen attributes to the
God of Jesus Christ what we might designate as ‘protomorphism’ and ‘poly-
morphism’. Protomorphism refers to God’s primary and principal form, which
remains incomprehensible to rational human creatures on their own; polymor-
phism refers to God’s kenotic self-revelation to humans in many diverse and
appropriately accessible forms. Origen appreciates that, in the incarnation and
inscription of the Word of God, the divine consideration for humanity extends
not only to all humans communally, but also to each human personally. Com-
ing down in human flesh and human script, the Word adapts and accommodates
himself in as many forms as appropriate to the various capabilities of human
persons. This polymorphism of the incarnate and inscribed Word appears on
each of the three distinct, but inseparable, levels of (1) his divinity, (2) his
humanity, and (3) his textuality. Although the precise details of their struc-
tural relationships are not entirely clarified by Origen here, this polymorphism
of ‘forms’ (μορφαί, εἰδῶν) seems to include or be extended by, but neither
exhaust nor be exhausted by, the various noetic ‘aspects’ (ἐπίνοιαι) of the
Word.11 All of these formal and aspectual expressions, moreover, are radically
7
Cels. 5.28 (FC 50/4, 924.21-4): ἐπεὶ δὲ νομίζομεν καὶ τῶν ἐξεταστικωτέρων τινὰς
ἐντεύξεσθαι τῇδε τῇ γραφῇ, φέρε ὀλίγα τῶν βαθυτέρων παρακινδυνεύοντες ἐκθώμεθα, ἔχοντά
τινα μυστικὴν καὶ ἀπόρρητον θεωρίαν.
8
See Cels. 4.37 (FC 50/3, 736.26-8); 4.39 (FC 50/3, 746.15-8); 5.47 (FC 50/4, 966.15-20);
6.26 (FC 50/4, 1058.6-13); 6.49 (FC 50/4, 1108.22-1110.2); 6.51 (FC 50/4, 1112.28-1114.2);
7.11 (FC 50/5, 1200.17-1202.4); 7.31 (FC 50/5, 1240.19-26); 8.65 (FC 50/5, 1450.24-9).
9
See Cels. 3.54 (FC 50/2, 610.22-612.2); 6.1 (FC 50/4, 1004.9-18); 6.10 (FC 50/4, 1024.13-9);
8.52 (FC 50/5, 1422.4-13).
10
See Cels. P.3-4 (FC 50/1, 186.3-188.1); 4.15 (FC 50/3, 686.5-14); 4.28 (FC 50/3, 712.16-
714.16); 7.41 (FC 50/5, 1264.4-17); 7.46 (FC 50/5, 1278.13-6).
11
For Origen’s treatments of these forms, see Marguerite Harl, Origène et la fonction révéla-
trice du Verbe incarné, PatSor 2 (Paris, 1958), 228-42; John A. McGuckin, ‘The Changing Forms
14 A.M. REISENAUER
grounded in, but not exhaustive of, God’s protomorphic ‘form’ (μορφή). The
multiplicities of divine, human, and textual forms come down to humans from
the primary and principal form of God, to whom they also lead humans back
up. As such, the Word’s polymorphism essentially and functionally depends on
his divine protomorphism. For Origen, God expresses his protomorphic loving
kindness in and through the various forms of his incarnate and inscribed Word,
who makes himself available to each and every human person, whether more
simple or more sophisticated, and thus grants them progressive access to the
primary and principal form of God. To elucidate this claim, this article explores
Origen’s understanding of the polymorphism and protomorphism (1) of the
incarnate Word, and (2) of the inscribed Word.
1. Incarnate Word
Although Origen admits that the reasons why God the Father sent his Son in
human flesh are innumerable, he nevertheless gleans from Scripture12 that one
of the most basic reasons for the incarnational economy of Jesus Christ13 is to
benefit all of humanity.14 This beneficial intention concentrates on the salvation
of God’s rational creation that has fallen in its sin.15 Since salvation unto ‘“eter-
nal life consists in knowing the only” supreme, “true God, and Jesus Christ
whom he sent”’ (John 17:3),16 and since human reason, of itself, is insufficient
of Jesus’, in Lothar Lies (ed.), Origeniana Quarta (Innsbruck, Vienna, 1987), 215-22; Dragos
A. Giulea, ‘Origen’s Christology in Pre-Nicene Setting: The Logos as the Noetic Form of God’,
EThL 92.3 (2016), 407-37. For Origen’s treatments of these aspects, see Manlio Simonetti, ‘Note
sulla teologia trinitaria di Origene’, VetChr 8 (1971), 273-307, 287-91; Henri Crouzel, ‘Le con-
tenu spirituel des dénominations du Christ selon le livre I du Commentaire sur Jean d’Origène’,
in Henri Crouzel and Antonio Quacquarelli (eds), Origeniana Secunda (Rome, 1980), 131-50;
Henri Crouzel, Origen, trans. A.S. Worrall (San Francisco, 1989), 188-92; J. Wolinski, ‘Le recours
aux ἐπίνοιαι du Christ dans le Commentaire sur Jean d’Origène’, in Gilles Dorival and Alain Le
Boulluec (eds), Origeniana Sexta: Origène et la Bible / Origen and the Bible (Leuven, 1995), 465-
92; Ronald E. Heine, ‘Epinoiai’, in John A. McGuckin (ed.), The Westminster Handbook to
Origen (Louisville, 2004), 93-5; Matthew Kuhner, ‘The “Aspects of Christ” (Epinoiai Christou) in
Origen’s Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans’, HThR 110 (2017), 195-216.
12
See Cels. 2.71 (FC 50/2, 494.11-5).
13
For Origen’s Christology in Cels., see J. Daniélou, Origen (1955), 257-62; M. Harl, Origène
(1958), 305-31; Michel Fédou, La Sagesse et le monde: Essai sur la christologie d’Origène
(Paris, 1995); Brian E. Daley, ‘Word, Soul, and Flesh: Origen and Augustine on the Person of
Christ’, AugSt 36.2 (2005), 299-326; Michel Fédou, La voie du Christ: Genèses de la christologie
dans le contexte religieux de l’Antiquité du IIe siècle au début du IVe siècle (Paris, 2006), 379-407;
M. Fiedrowicz, introduction to Gegen Celsus, FC 50/1 (2011), 56-66, 70-3, 97-104.
14
See Cels. 1.61 (FC 50/1, 322.23-30); 2.23 (FC 50/1, 406.10-7); 2.33 (FC 50/2, 422.8-14);
3.17 (FC 50/2, 540.9-12).
15
See Cels. 4.19 (FC 50/3, 692.10-8); 8.11 (FC 50/5, 1342.11-7).
16
Cels. 3.37 (FC 50/2, 576.20-2): „τὴν αἰώνιον αὐτοῖς εἶναι ζωὴν ἐν τῷ γινώσκειν τὸν
μόνον“ ἐπὶ πᾶσιν „ἀληθινὸν θεὸν καὶ ὃν ἐκεῖνος ἀπέστειλεν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν“.
to attain such knowledge, it belongs to the Word, who alone knows the Father,
to make God known to humans.17 The descent of God, most especially in his
incarnation, does not serve to benefit God, as though God needed to learn
something about humans or wanted to show himself off to them, as Celsus
mocks. Rather, God’s descent to instruct and show himself in humility, benefits
humans, who are thereby delivered from sin, death, and demonic oppression,
and made God’s friends through his indwelling Word and Spirit.18 Even simple
Christians can grasp, without being confused, that the incarnation effects and
expresses the philanthropic interweaving of divinity and humanity, without
ontological confusion, in Christ and in those Christians who belong to his
corporate body, the Church of God.19 In his virginal conception,20 the immortal
Word has ‘assumed both a mortal body and a human soul’ (καὶ σῶμα θνητὸν
καὶ ψυχὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἀναλαβών)21 and has thus united himself to human
nature, which integrally consists of ‘body’ (σῶμα), ‘soul’ (ψυχή), and ‘spirit’
(πνεῦμα).22 The integrities of Christ’s two natures keep him from becoming a
mythological figure, and enable true human blood, not ichor, as Celsus ridicules,
to bleed from his crucified human body, even while his divine nature remains
ever unchanged.23
In considering God’s descent, Origen upholds the ‘unchangeable and unalter-
able nature of God’ (τὸ ἄτρεπτον καὶ ἀναλλοίωτον τοῦ θεοῦ), about whom
Scripture says, ‘“You are the same”’ (Ps. 102[101]:28) („Σὺ δὲ ὁ αὐτὸς εἶ“),
and who says in Scripture, ‘“I do not change”’ (Mal. 3:6) („Οὐκ ἠλλοίωμαι“).24
The divine descent is neither physical nor spatial, as Celsus imagines, but rather
a providential and powerful coming down to humans, among whom God, who
‘“fill[s] heaven and earth”’ (Jer. 23:24) („τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν … πληρῶ“),
is always present.25 In fact, the Son of God variously descends in each genera-
tion to improve humanity before, in, and after his incarnation, and has involved
himself in the establishment of Judaism and Christianity.26 Consistent with these
17
See Cels. 2.71 (FC 50/2, 494.3-11); 6.62 (FC 50/4, 1136.7-16); 6.65 (FC 50/4, 1142.3-23);
7.38 (FC 50/5, 1254.20-5); 7.42 (FC 50/5, 1266.15-21).
18
See Cels. 4.3 (FC 50/3, 664.8-666.2); 4.6 (FC 50/3, 670.18-672.11); 7.17 (FC 50/5, 1212.6-
1214.4).
19
See Cels. 2.9 (FC 50/2, 366.27-372.5); 3.28 (FC 50/2, 560.27-562.8); 6.47-8 (FC 50/4,
1106.6-1108.14); 7.16-7 (FC 50/5, 1210.7-1214.4).
20
See Cels. 1.32-7 (FC 50/1, 258.1-272.3); 6.73 (FC 50/4, 1156.26-1158.8).
21
Cels. 4.15 (FC 50/3, 686.21-2).
22
Cels. 2.51 (FC 50/2, 454.10).
23
See Cels. 1.66 (FC 50/1, 334.17-336.3). On the various deployments of the euhemerist
critique of the gods as deified humans by Celsus and Origen in Cels., see Harry Y. Gamble,
‘Euhemerism and Christology in Origen: Contra Celsum III 22-43’, VigChr 33.1 (1979), 12-29.
24
Cels. 1.21 (FC 50/1, 232.13, 15-7); 4.14 (FC 50/3, 684.8-686.4); 6.62 (FC 50/4, 1136.15-6).
25
See Cels. 4.5 (FC 50/3, 668.16-670.17); 4.12 (FC 50/3, 680.20-5); 5.12 (FC 50/4, 892.20-
894.9); 6.71 (FC 50/4, 1154.11-1156.2).
26
See Cels. 3.14 (FC 50/2, 534.24-536.9); 4.4 (FC 50/3, 668.6-15); 4.7-9 (FC 50/3, 672.19-
676.1); 6.79 (FC 50/4, 1172.20-4). For Origen’s appreciations of the religious, ethical, and
16 A.M. REISENAUER
descents, ‘because of his great love for humanity, [God] made one special
descent in order to convert those whom the divine Scripture mystically calls
“the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt. 15:24), which had strayed
down from the mountains’.27 In his pastoral condescension, ‘God changes for
humans the power of the Word, whose nature it is to nourish the human soul,
in accordance with the merits of each individual’, so as to become ‘“rational
milk without guile”’ (1Pet. 2:2) for infantile persons, an ‘“herb”’ (Rom. 14:2)
for weaker persons, and ‘“solid food”’ (Heb. 5:12, 14) for stronger persons.28
Even the soul of ‘“Christ Jesus, who being in the form of God (ἐν μορφῇ
θεοῦ), … emptied himself, taking the form of a servant (μορφὴν δούλου)”’
(Phil. 2:5-7) in human flesh.29
In the incarnational economy, Jesus not only reveals himself to humans, but
also conceals himself from them, such that he is not entirely known even to
those who know him, and is entirely unknown to those who don’t.30 Christ’s
concealment is not avoidance of other humans, but rather tactful consideration
for them.31 Such discretion of Jesus is considerate of the various capacities of
humans, and reflects not only God’s concealment of himself in darkness from
those who cannot logically and spiritually bear his radiance yet, but also his
proportional revelation of himself in light to those who participate, with varying
intensities, in his Logos and Spirit.32 Origen sees that it is not only the Father
who is difficult to perceive, but also the Son, and that, since only the pure of
heart can perceive God,33 ‘[t]here are some characteristics in the divine nature
of the Word’ that pertain to his being sent as a physician to heal the sick and
sinners, ‘but others’34 that pertain to his being sent to the healed and pure as a
historical connections, continuities, and discontinuities between Judaism and Christianity in Cels.,
see Paul M. Blowers, ‘Origen, the Rabbis, and the Bible: Toward a Picture of Judaism and Chris-
tianity in Third-Century Caesarea’, in Charles Kannengiesser and William L. Petersen (eds),
Origen of Alexandria: His World and His Legacy, CJAn 1 (Notre Dame, 1988), 96-116; Peter
J. Gorday, ‘Moses and Jesus in Contra Celsum 7.1-25: Ethics, History and Jewish-Christian
Eirenics in Origen’s Theology’, in ibid. 313-36; Louis H. Feldman, ‘Origen’s Contra Celsum and
Josephus’ Contra Apionem: The Issue of Jewish Origins’, VigChr 44.2 (1990), 105-35.
27
Cels. 4.17 (FC 50/3, 690.6-9): μίαν ἐξαίρετον ἀπὸ πολλῆς φιλανθρωπίας κατάβασιν ὑπὲρ
τοῦ ἐπιστρέψαι τά, ὡς ἡ θεία ὠνόμασε μυστικῶς γραφή, „ἀπολωλότα πρόβατα οἴκου Ἰσραήλ“,
καὶ καταβάντα ἀπὸ τῶν ὀρῶν.
28
Cels. 4.18 (FC 50/3, 692.1-5): τὴν τοῦ πεφυκότος τρέφειν ἀνθρωπίνην ψυχὴν λόγου
δύναμιν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἑκάστῳ κατ᾽ἀξίαν μεταβάλλει … „λογικὸν ἄδολον γάλα“ …
„λάχανον“ … „στερεὰ τροφή“.
29
Cels. 4.18 (FC 50/3, 692.21-3): „Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, ὃς ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων … ἑαυτὸν
ἐκένωσε μορφὴν δούλου λαβών“.
30
See Cels. 2.67 (FC 50/2, 484.19-26); 2.70 (FC 50/2, 492.13-7); 2.72 (FC 50/2, 494.21-4).
31
See Cels. 4.3 (50/3, 666.5-20).
32
See Cels. 5.10-1 (FC 50/4, 888.17-892.19); 6.17 (FC 50/4, 1040.20-1042.3); 6.66-7 (FC 50/4,
1144.8-1146.28).
33
See Cels. 6.69 (FC 50/4, 1150.5-27); 7.43 (FC 50/5, 1268.12-1270.5).
34
Cels. 3.61 (FC 50/2, 622.14, 17): Ἔστι γὰρ ἐν τῇ τοῦ λόγου θειότητι ἄλλα … ἄλλα δὲ τά.
teacher of divine mysteries.35 Origen’s gesture towards a polymorphism on the

level of the Word’s divinity, which communicates his protomorphic ‘“form of
God”’ (Phil. 2:6) („μορφῇ θεοῦ“),36 thickens as he writes:
Although Jesus was one, he had several aspects (ἐπίνοιαι); and to those who saw him,
he did not appear alike to all. That he had many aspects (ἐπίνοιαι) is clear from the say-
ing, ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life’ (John 14:6), and ‘I am the bread’ (John 6:35),
and ‘I am the door’ (John 10:7, 9), and countless other such sayings.37
Since Origen understands these ‘I am’ Christological titles as referring

not to Christ’s humanity, but rather to his divinity,38 he implies that the multi-
plicity of aspects belongs, in the first place, on the divine level. What prevent
these polymorphic aspects and biblical names of God from deteriorating into
the polytheistic fractures and fragmentations of the divine that belong to the
paganisms of the Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, Indians, and other nations, are
their intrinsic coherence and complete integration within the more radical
protomorphism of the one God.39
The same consideration for the variety of human capacities is also shown in
polymorphism on the level of the Word’s humanity. Whereas the body of Jesus
appeared in the beauty and glory of his metamorphic ‘transfiguration’ (μετα-
μόρφωσις) on the high mountain, not to all of his apostles, but only to the more
perceptive Peter, James, and John, it appeared to the less perceptive multitude
down below, who were not yet able to ascend, in such a ‘“dishonorable and
deserted form”’ (Isa. 53:3) („τὸ εἶδος αὐτοῦ ἄτιμον καὶ ἐκλεῖπον“) that, to
them, Christ, who was crucified in the sight of all, ‘“had neither form nor
beauty”’ (Isa. 53:2) („οὐκ εἶχεν εἶδος οὐδὲ κάλλος“).40 Likewise, to his
disciples, who were healthy enough to ascend the mountain, Jesus, as a teacher,
gave the teaching of the beatitudes, but to the unhealthy, who were lower
down the mountain and unable to ascend, Jesus, as a physician, gave the heal-
ing of their diseases.41 To his more capable disciples inside the house, Jesus
privately provided esoteric explanations of the parables, which he had spoken
35
See Cels. 3.61-4 (FC 50/2, 622.9-628.28); 8.72 (FC 50/5, 1464.23-1466.8).
36
Cels. 4.15 (FC 50/3, 686.5); 4.18 (FC 50/3, 692.21).
37
Cels. 2.64 (FC 50/2, 476.23-7): Ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἷς ὢν πλείονα τῇ ἐπινοίᾳ ἦν, καὶ τοῖς
βλέπουσιν οὐχ ὁμοίως πᾶσιν ὁρώμενος. Καὶ ὅτι μὲν τῇ ἐπινοίᾳ πλείονα ἠν, καὶ σαφὲς ἐκ τοῦ
„Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ὁδὸς καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια καὶ ἡ ζωὴ“ καὶ τοῦ „Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος“ καὶ τοῦ „Ἐγώ εἰμι
ἡ θύρα“ καὶ ἄλλων μυρίων.
38
See Cels. 2.9 (FC 50/2, 368.9-12); 2.25 (FC 50/2, 410.5-10); 7.16 (FC 50/5, 1210.7-1212.5).
39
See Cels. 1.23-5 (FC 50/1, 234.11-242.20); 3.36-7 (FC 50/2, 574.10-578.21); 7.64-5 (FC 50/5,
1310.16-1314.8); 8.3-6 (FC 50/5, 1328.14-1336.2). On the plurality of divine names in Cels.,
see M. Fiedrowicz, introduction to Gegen Celsus, FC 50/1 (2011), 96-7.
40
See Cels. 1.54 (FC 50/1, 306.8-308.12); 2.64 (FC 50/2, 476.27-478.7); 2.65 (FC 50/2, 480.15-9);
4.16 (FC 50/3, 688.8-20); 6.68 (FC 50/4, 1148.20-6); 6.77 (FC 50/4, 1166.6-1168.1).
41
See Cels. 2.64 (FC 50/2, 478.7-13); 3.21 (FC 50/2, 544.11-6).
18 A.M. REISENAUER
exoterically, without explanations, to the less capable crowds outside.42 For

Origen, these incarnational manifestations are neither merely objective nor
merely subjective, but rather both. As Creator, the Word objectively informs the
transformable matter of his body, at different times, with qualities of splendor or
ugliness, but always does so out of consideration for the various subjective capa-
bilities of his spectators.43 Jesus presents his humanity in many forms, each of
which corresponds to one of the three basic, or five nuanced, stages of spiritual
development.44 His purpose in this is to draw each and every person, whether
more simple or more sophisticated, progressively up ‘the spiritual “high moun-
tain”’ (Matt. 17:1) (τὸ λογικὸν „ὑψηλὸν ὄρος“) to behold ‘the primary
form’ (τῆς πρώτης μορφῆς) of his divinity.45 Origen thus explains:
He who came down to humans was originally ‘in the form of God’ („ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ“)
and because of his love to humanity ‘emptied himself’ (Phil. 2:6-7) that humans might
be able to receive him. … ‘[T]he Word’ remains Word in essence. He suffers nothing
of the experience of the body or the soul. But sometimes he ‘comes down’ to the level
of him who is unable to look upon the radiance and brilliance of the deity, and
‘becomes’, as it were, ‘flesh’ (John 1:14), and is spoken of in physical terms, until he
who has accepted him in this form is gradually lifted up by the Word and can look even
upon, so to speak, his principal form (προηγουμένην μορφὴν). There are, as it were,
different forms (διάφοροι … μορφαί) of the Word. For the Word appears to each of
those who are led to know him in a form corresponding to the state of the individual,
whether he is a beginner, or has made a little progress, or is considerably advanced, or
has nearly attained to virtue already, or has in fact attained it.46
In light of this purpose, Origen rejects the proposal of Celsus’ Jewish pro-
tagonist that Jesus ought to have displayed his divine power by suddenly disap-
pearing from the cross, not because this would have been impossible for God,
but because it would not have been advantageous for humans, since Christ’s
public and true crucifixion unto death establishes their incorporation into him.47
Neither would the display of divine power by the resurrected Jesus to the man
42
See Cels. 2.64 (FC 50/2, 478.13-8); 3.21 (FC 50/2, 544.4-11).
43
See Cels. 4.57 (FC 50/3, 784.1-30); 6.77 (FC 50/4, 1164.27-1166.6); 7.39 (FC 50/5,
1258.6-1260.5).
44
See Cels. 4.16 (FC 50/3, 688.4-7); 4.18 (FC 50/3, 690.24-692.6).
45
See Cels. 6.68 (FC 50/4, 1148.1-28).
46
Cels. 4.15-6 (FC 50/3, 686.5-7, 23-688.7): Τὸ δὲ καταβεβηκὸς εἰς ἀνθρώπους „ἐν μορφῇ
θεοῦ“ ὑπῆρχε καὶ διὰ φιλανθρωπίαν „ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν“, ἵνα χωρηθῆναι ὑπ᾽ἀνθρώπων
δυνηθῇ. … „ὁ λόγος“ τῇ οὐσίᾳ μένων λόγος οὐδὲν μὲν πάσχει ὧν πάσχει τὸ σῶμα ἢ ἡ ψυχή
„συγκαταβαίνων“ δ᾽ἔσθ᾽ὅτε τῷ μὴ δυναμένῳ αὐτοῦ τὰς μαρμαρυγὰς καὶ τὴν λαμπρότητα τῆς
θειότητος βλέπειν οἱονεὶ „σὰρξ γίνεται“, σωματικῶς λαλούμενος, ἕως ὁ τοιοῦτον αὐτὸν
παραδεξάμενος κατὰ βραχὺ ὑπὸ τοῦ λόγου μετεωριζόμενος δυνηθῇ αὐτοῦ καὶ τήν, ἵν᾽οὕτως
ὀνομάσω, προηγουμένην μορφὴν θεάσασθαι. Εἰσι γὰρ διάφοροι οἱονεὶ τοῦ λόγου μορφαί,
καθὼς ἑκάστῳ τῶν εἰς ἐπιστήμην ἀγουμένων φαίνεται ὁ λόγος, ἀνάλογον τῇ ἕξει τοῦ
εἰσαγομένου ἢ ἐπ᾽ὀλίγον προκόπτοντος ἤ ἐπὶ πλεῖον ἢ καὶ ἐγγὺς ἤδη γινομένου τῆς ἀρετῆς
ἢ καὶ ἐν ἀρετῇ γεγενημένου.
47
See Cels. 2.56 (FC 50/2, 464.21-466.23); 2.68-9 (FC 50/2, 484.27-490.21).
who condemned him, the men who maltreated him, or even the crowds who
believed in him, have been consistent with his consideration for their lesser
capacities, since his brilliance would have blinded them. Even his disciples, to
whom Christ appeared intermittently, could not receive the divine brilliance of
his resurrection without periods of relief, much as Abraham and the Old Testa-
ment saints received the appearances of God, not always, but at intervals.48 Unlike
Celsus, Origen thus appreciates that God’s power is not raw, but considerate
and consistent with his wisdom and love for humans. With this appreciation,
Origen points detractors and doubters of Christianity to the polymorphic indica-
tions of Jesus’ divinity that abide in the Church49 and its Scripture.
2. Inscribed Word
The Word intends the benefit of salvation for all humans, not only in his
incarnation in Jesus, but also in his inscription in Scripture.50 In Cels., Origen
presents to his target audience of those with little or no faith, a rather simple
biblical hermeneutics that registers two distinct, but integrated, levels of mean-
ing: (1) the literal level of its surface, and (2) the spiritual level of its depths
and heights. Origen sees that the protomorphic form of Scripture consists in its
‘obviously divine character proclaimed in those very books’ (τὴν ἐμφαινομέ-
νην θειότητα ἐν τοῖς αὐτοῖς βιβλίοις ἀπαγγελλομένην).51 Scripture itself
48
See Cels. 2.63 (FC 50/2, 474.28-476.22); 2.64-7 (FC 50/2, 478.23-484.26).
49
These include the extensive conversion to, and amelioration in, Christ of various classes,
ethnicities, and generations of humanity; their witness in ethos and pathos even unto death; and
miracles. See Cels. 1.2 (FC 50/1, 196.8-22); 1.26-7 (FC 50/1, 244.7-248.2); et passim. On the
ecclesial and moral evidences for Christianity in Cels., see M. Fiedrowicz, introduction to Gegen
Celsus, FC 50/1 (2011), 104-9.
50
For general discussions of Origen’s exegetical theory and practice, including his understand-
ings and treatments of the somatic, psychic, and pneumatic senses of Scripture, see the more
approving studies of J. Daniélou, Origen (1955), 131-99; Henri de Lubac, History and Spirit:
The Understanding of Scripture according to Origen, trans. Anne E. Nash (San Francisco, 2007);
Karen J. Torjesen, Hermeneutical Procedure and Theological Method in Origen’s Exegesis, PTS 28
(Berlin, New York, 1986); John D. Dawson, Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of
Identity (Berkeley, Los Angeles, 2001); Elizabeth A. Dively Lauro, The Soul and Spirit of Scripture
within Origen’s Exegesis (Boston, 2005); Peter W. Martens, Origen and Scripture: The Contours
of the Exegetical Life (New York, 2012); A.-C. Jacobsen, Christ – The Teacher of Salvation (2015),
75-80; and the more disapproving study of R.P.C. Hanson, Allegory and Event: A Study of the
Sources and Significance of Origen’s Interpretation of Scripture (Louisville, 2002). For specific
discussions of his biblical hermeneutics and exegeses in Cels., see Manlio Simonetti, ‘La Sacra
Scrittura nel Contro Celso’, in L. Perrone (ed.), Discorsi di verità (1998), 97-114; Hermann
J. Vogt, ‘Die Exegese des Origenes in Contra Celsum – Das neue Interesse an der Eschatologie’, in
Hermann J. Vogt, Origenes als Exeget, ed. Wilhelm Geerlings (Paderborn, 1999), 143-59; M. Fied-
rowicz, introduction to Gegen Celsus, FC 50/1 (2011), 77-89; A.-C. Jacobsen, Christ – The Teacher
of Salvation (2015), 96-101.
51
Cels. 1.63 (FC 50/1, 328.12-3).
20 A.M. REISENAUER
instructs about its divine sense that its divinely inspired human writers and
readers are able to detect.52 As Origen observes:
[T]here is, as the Scripture calls it, a certain generic divine sense which only the one
who is blessed finds on this earth. Thus Solomon says, ‘You shall find a divine sense’
(Prov. 2:5). There are many forms (εἰδῶν) of this sense.53
The polymorphic forms of this divine sense are visible, audible, tastable,
smellable, or tangible, but none of these sensibles belongs to the body, since
all of them belong to the spirit. These forms enable writers to invest, and read-
ers to perceive, spiritual meanings in the scriptural corpus.54 Origen suggests
that spiritual meanings are accessible in the text not only to the sophisticated
few, but also to the simple multitude, when he comments that, ‘when our Savior
says, “He that has ears to hear” (Matt. 11:15, 13:9; etc.), even the unintelligent
person understands that this refers to spiritual ears.’55
This communication of beneficial doctrine, in the same set of texts, to those
whose spiritual senses are more refined, and to those less refined, is distinctive
to the inscribed Word of God. The economy of Christian revelation does not
produce two discrete series of books, one more elementary, another more
elite. Rather, the single corpus of Scripture addresses everyone in ways that
are appropriate and beneficent to each. Whereas the writings of the pagan
poets harm their simpler readers and hearers, and those of the philosophers
are not only impotent to instruct them, but also inconsistent with ‘“worship in
spirit and truth”’ (John 4:24) („ἐν πνεύματι καὶ ἀληθείᾳ δεῖ προσκυνεῖν“),56
the books of Scripture contain and convey divine power.57 Even with its
apparently ‘mean style’ (εὐτελὴς λέξις),58 Scripture communicates power that
can instantly transform its more simple, and its more sophisticated, recipients.59
As Origen remarks:
52
On inspiration and prophecy in Cels., see Robert J. Hauck, The More Divine Proof: Prophecy
and Inspiration in Celsus and Origen, AAR.AS 69 (Atlanta, 1989), esp. 77-143; Hermann J. Vogt,
‘Die Lehre des Origenes von der Inspiration der Heiligen Schrift: Ein Vergleich zwischen der
Grundlagenschrift und der Antwort auf Kelsos’, in H.J. Vogt, Origenes als Exeget (1999), 179-85.
53
Cels. 1.48 (FC 50/1, 292.4-8): οὔσης, ὡς ἡ γραφὴ ὠνόμασε, θείας τινὸς γενικῆς αἰσθήσεως,
ἣν μόνος ὁ μακάριος εὑρίσκει ἤδη κατὰ τὸ λεγόμενον καὶ παρὰ τῷ Σολομῶντι· „Ὅτι αἴσθησιν
θείαν εὑρήσεις“, καὶ ὄντων εἰδῶν ταύτης τῆς αἰσθήσεως.
54
See Cels. 1.42 (FC 50/1, 278.16-280.4); 1.48 (FC 50/1, 292.8-294.15); 7.4 (FC 50/5,
1184.27-1186.7); 7.7 (FC 50/5, 1192.8-1194.16); 7.34 (FC 50/5, 1246.23-1248.17); 7.39 (FC 50/5,
1258.6-1260.5).
55
Cels. 7.34 (FC 50/5, 1248.7-9): ἐπὰν λέγῃ ὁ σωτὴρ ἡμῶν· „Ὁ ἔχων ὦτα ἀκούειν ἀκουέτω“,
καὶ ὁ τυχὼν συνίησι περὶ θειοτέρων ταῦτα λέγεσθαι ὤτων.
56
Cels. 2.71 (FC 50/2, 494.11); 6.70 (FC 50/4, 1154.1); 7.27 (FC 50/5, 1234.3-4).
57
See Cels. 1.2 (FC 50/1, 192.8-22); 1.18 (FC 50/1, 226.7-228.6); 4.48-50 (FC 50/3, 762.22-
770.15); 5.38 (FC 50/4, 948.31-950.2); 7.46-7 (FC 50/5, 1278.5-1280.9); 7.49 (FC 50/5, 1282.6-21).
58
Cels. 6.2 (FC 50/4, 1004.25, 1006.5); 6.5 (FC 50/4, 1014.10).
59
See Cels. 6.1-5 (FC 50/4, 1004.4-1014.13); 7.59 (FC 50/5, 1300.7-23); 7.60-61 (FC 50/5,
1304.14-1306.8).
[T]he histories [of Scripture] also were written with an eye to a tropological meaning,
and were arranged very wisely to be exactly suited both to the multitude of simple-
minded believers, and to the few who have the desire, or the capacity, to examine the
events with intelligence.60
Since the Word of God intends his various readers to become wise and
worthy of God, he speaks in textual forms adapted and accommodated to
them.61 To more simple persons, the Word provides the ‘“milk”’ (1Cor. 3:2;
Heb. 5:12-3) („γάλα“) of simpler teaching; to more sophisticated, he provides
the ‘“meat”’ (1Cor. 3:2) („βρῶμα“) or ‘“solid food”’ (Heb. 5:12, 14) („στερεὰ
τροφή“) of profounder teaching.62 As a father coming down to his children,
God’s Word inscribes himself with human characters and describes himself
with human characteristics, since the Word is proclaimed to humans.63 Out of
consideration for what is worthy of his divine nature, and for what is appropri-
ate for his diverse human audience, God speaks not only woes and threats for
the healing and moral reformation of the simple-minded multitude, but also
obscurities, allegories, and enigmas for the intellectual exercise of the intelligent
few.64
This plurality of meanings on the textual level of God’s Word, however,
does not compromise the intrinsic coherence of Scripture. For Origen, the entire
biblical text has a protomorphic spiritual character that enables every wise Chris-
tian reader to advance seamlessly, through careful and prayerful study, from
the clear presentation of its exoteric wisdom into the obscure and inexhaustible
depths of its esoteric wisdom.65 Scripture itself encourages its readers to ascend
from ‘“the letter”’ („γράμμα“) (i.e., a sensible, literal interpretation) that, when
unedifying on its own, ‘“kills”’ („ἀποκτέωειν“) to ‘the spirit’ (i.e., an intelligi-
ble, spiritual interpretation) that ‘“gives life”’ (2Cor. 3:6) („τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα
ζῳοποιεῖν“).66 The Word conceals profound meanings in obscure textual
forms out of consideration for those who are not yet worthy and capable of
60
Cels. 4.49 (FC 50/3, 766.6-10): καὶ ταῖς ἱστορίαις ὡς σκοπῷ τροπολογίας γεγραμμέναις
καὶ σοφώτατα οἰκονομηθείσαις, ἐστοχασμένως τοῦ τε πλήθους τῶν ἁπλούστερον πιστευόντων
καὶ τῶν ὀλίγων μετὰ συνέσεως ἐξετάζειν τὰ πράγματα βουλομένων ἤ καὶ δυναμένων.
61
See Cels. 3.45-9 (FC 50/2, 592.16-602.20); 3.54 (FC 50/2, 610.1-612.2); 3.58-9 (FC 50/2,
616.15-620.15); 3.74 (FC 50/2, 644.19-646.12).
62
See Cels. 3.52-3 (FC 50/2, 608.1-27); 3.60 (FC 50/2, 620.21-5).
63
See Cels. 3.75 (FC 50/2, 648.25-7, 650.7-9); 3.79 (FC 50/2, 654.14-656.2); 4.71 (FC 50/3,
808.11-810.4).
64
See Cels. 2.76 (FC 50/2, 500.18-504.27); 3.45 (FC 50/2, 594.24-7); 4.72 (FC 50/3, 810.5-
812.24); 5.15-6 (FC 50/4, 898.11-902.14); 7.10 (FC 50/5, 1198.23-1200.4).
65
See Cels. 1.7 (FC 50/1, 202.20-204.11); 1.9 (FC 50/1, 206.20-210.3); 2.4-6 (FC 50/2,
358.3-362.6); 3.37-8 (FC 50/2, 576.19-580.19); 7.18 (FC 50/5, 1214.20-4). For Origen’s theory
and practice of prayer in Cels., see Lorenzo Perrone, ‘Prayer in Origen’s Contra Celsum: The
Knowledge of God and the Truth of Christianity’, VigChr 55.1 (2001), 1-19.
66
See Cels. 2.1 (FC 50/2, 348.25-8); 6.70 (FC 50/4, 1152.19-25); 7.20 (FC 50/5, 1218.29-
1220.24).
22 A.M. REISENAUER
understanding them.67 The Word often records stories of actual events in order
to exhibit deeper truths at which the text itself hints.68 Beyond these, there are
even more esoteric doctrines, spoken to the prophets or disciples, which are
mentioned, but not recorded, in Scripture.69 Like the humanity of the Word, his
textuality can neither express nor exhaust God’s fullness, even while it expresses
the loving consideration of God who adapts and accommodates his Scripture to
all humans in order to shepherd them up to behold the primary form of his
divinity.70
Concluding Remarks
Origen regards the polymorphism of God’s Word in his incarnation in Jesus

and his inscription in Scripture as communicative of the protomorphic divinity
of God who, in his loving consideration for the salvation of each and every
human, adapts and accommodates himself to the various human capabilities in
order to gradually raise all of them up to himself. Origen himself witnesses to
God’s incarnational and inscriptional purpose by condescending, in Cels., to
express more basic forms of thought than those of his other theological com-
positions. In whatever form Origen expresses the contents of his faith and
understanding to his diverse audiences, he endeavors to keep its substance and
spirit protomorphically the same: substantial truth and spiritual love.71 Such
verity and charity are reflective of, and conducive towards, the true and loving
God, whose kaleidoscopic custom is to bend down to all humans, at whatever
depths, in order to lift them up to his most sublime heights. As Origen responds
to Celsus, for humans to come to know, and to be saved by, God, ‘the Word
of God is sufficient, … [for,] who but the divine Word can save and lead the
human soul to the supreme God?’72
67
See Cels. 6.18 (FC 50/4, 1042.4-8, 15-23).
68
See Cels. 4.44 (FC 50/3, 754.19-23).
69
See Cels. 1.31 (FC 50/1, 256.13-6); 6.6 (FC 50/4, 1014.19-1016.11).
70
Although Origen appears to refrain from explicitly articulating, in Cels., his typical tri-
chotomy of Scripture’s body, soul, and spirit, this articulation would have provided further inter-
nal connections between the textuality and the trichotomous humanity of the Word.
71
On unity behind diversity, see A.-C. Jacobsen, Christ – The Teacher of Salvation (2015), 15-6.
72
Cels. 6.68 (FC 50/4, 1148.3, 6-7): ἱκανός ἐστιν ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος, … Τίς δ᾽ἄλλος σῶσαι
καὶ προσαγαγεῖν τῷ ἐπὶ πᾶσι θεῷ δύναται τὴν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ψυχὴν ἢ ὁ θεὸς λόγος;
The Self-Sufficiency of Scripture for Figurative Exegesis
in Origen’s Contra Celsum
Harry LINES, University of Oxford, UK
ABSTRACT
Widely considered the foremost proponent of figurative exegesis of Scripture in the
early Church, Origen’s opponents both within and without the Church frequently accused
him of plagiarising interpretative methods not suitable for the Christian Scriptures. This
article outlines how Origen considered the Christian Scriptures to provide its readers
with the tools necessary to read Scripture figuratively, focussing on Origen’s arguments
to this effect in Contra Celsum, where he is most directly engaged with his non-Chris-
tian adversaries. In making this argument, Origen was fundamentally defending the
self-sufficiency of Christian philosophy and of the doctrines derived from figurative
interpretations of the Bible. Concentrating primarily on the way in which some of its
literary forms – parables, proverbs, and enigmas (παραβολαί, παροιμίαι, αἰνίγματα) –
serve this pedagogic purpose, this paper demonstrates first how Origen understood these
literary features to signpost both the nature of the texts and the need for the texts to be
approached in certain ways. My argument then explores the means by which Scripture
develops in its readers the necessary attributes to read it figuratively: through the grace
of the Holy Spirit active within its pages, though the moral education given through its
commandments, and through the rational discernment that it encourages in its readers
through its complex and enigmatic sayings.
Figurative Exegesis in Contra Celsum
As the first true polemicist against Christianity, Celsus more than any previ-
ous antagonist against the novel religion familiarised himself with the Jewish
and Christian Scriptures. Consequently, the Christian Scriptures, their authority,
and their interpretation take a central place in the polemics of both Celsus and
Origen, recorded in the Contra Celsum.1 In his response, Origen frequently
takes umbrage with Celsus’ use, or misuse, of Scripture, accusing him of mis-
representing, manipulating, and exaggerating what he finds for his own ends.2
1
See Manlio Simonetti, ‘La Sacra Scrittura Nel Contro Celso’, in L. Perrone (ed.), Discorsi
di verità. Paganesimo, giudaismo e cristianesimo a confronto nel “Contro Celso” di Origene (Roma,
1998), 97-114; L.N. Fernando, ‘Origen’s Use of Scripture in Contra Celsum’, in G. Dorival and
A. Le Boulluec (eds), Origeniana Sexta (Leuven, 1995), 243-50.
2
L. Fernando, ‘Origen’s Use of Scripture’ (1995), 244-7.

24 H. LINES
Beyond simply distorting the words of Christian Scripture, however, Celsus

also contends that such words are not legitimate objects of figurative interpre-
tation.3 Indeed, throughout Celsus’ The True Doctrine and Origen’s response,
an important underlying feature of the dispute is the disagreement over whose
texts constitute genuine loci of divine revelation, and so which could be inter-
preted figuratively.4 The two share a broad basis of agreement on the issue of
figurative exegesis, disagreeing only on which texts were legitimate objects of
this process.5
The Christian Scriptures, Celsus claimed, were not appropriate objects of
figurative interpretation. In Contra Celsum 4.38 and 4.50, Origen reports Celsus
saying ‘the more reasonable Jews and Christians, feeling ashamed of these
things, somehow try to allegorise them, but they do not allow for any allegory
and have clearly been imagined very simplemindedly’.6 Rather, the Christian
Scriptures, specifically the narrative of Genesis 2-3 in this case, are like legends
discussed among old women.7 In essence, the stories of Jewish and Christian
Scripture lack the minimum of dignity that would allow one to recognise that
there exists a figurative meaning under the veil of the letter.8 Consequently, any
attempt to interpret the Christian Scriptures figuratively would be an illegitimate
usage of the interpretative methods developed by Greek philosophers for their
own classical texts. This reflects a broader argument in The True Doctrine that
whatever was truly stated in the Jewish and Christian religions was plagiarised
from more ancient, more illustrious Near Eastern peoples, including from the
classical Greek authors and philosophers.9
Celsus was not alone in accusing the Christians of stealing the figurative inter-
pretative methods which were ill-suited for their texts. Porphyry, for instance,
states that Christians, ‘having been eager to find some solution to the immoral-
ity of the Jewish Scriptures, instead of renouncing them, turned to interpreta-
3
In this article, following the example of Ronald Heine, I will use the more neutral term
‘figurative’ rather than ‘allegorical’ when discussing Origen’s non-literal interpretations of texts,
since the terms ‘allegorical’ and ‘allegory’ often obscure as much as they illuminate Origen’s
hermeneutic method. See The Commentary of Origen on the Gospel of Matthew, trans. Ronald Heine,
2 vol. (Oxford, 2018), I 18. For further discussion on the difficulty of defining ‘allegory’, see also
Mark J. Edwards, Origen Against Plato (Aldershot, 2002), 123-6.
4
Blossom Stefaniw has effectively demonstrated how much of the dispute between Christians
and their pagan adversaries in this period centred on which texts were permitted objects of figura-
tive interpretation, each side claiming this permission for themselves. See Blossom Stefaniw,
Mind, Text, and Commentary: Noetic Exegesis in Origen of Alexandria, Didymus the Blind, and
Evagrius Ponticus (Frankfurt am Main, 2010), 73-86.
5
M. Simonetti, ‘La Sacra Scrittura Nel Contro Celso’ (1998), 111-2.
6
Origen, Contra Celsum (C. Cels.) 4.38 (SC 136, 278); 4.50 (SC 136, 314): Origène, Contre
Celse, livres I-IV, ed. and trans. Marcel Borret, SC 132, 136, 147, 150 (Paris, 1967-1969).
7
Ibid. 4.39 (SC 136, 282).
8
M. Simonetti, ‘La Sacra Scrittura Nel Contro Celso’ (1998), 99.
9
See ibid. 97-8; L. Fernando, ‘Origen’s Use of Scripture’ (1995), 246-7.
The Self-Sufficiency of Scripture for Figurative Exegesis 25
tions incompatible and unsuitable for what was written’, holding Old Testament
texts to be ‘enigmas (αἰνίγματα) and ascribing divine influence to them as if
they were oracles full of hidden mysteries’.10 In fact, Porphyry specifically
names Origen as the very source of this mistaken practice, saying that, from
his familiarity with various Greek philosophers, ‘having learned the allegorical
method of interpretation of the mysteries of the Greeks, he applied it to the
Jewish Scriptures’.11
Porphyry was not mistaken in suggesting that Origen was familiar with the
figurative method of interpretation used among the Greeks. Eusebius of Cae-
sarea reports on Origen’s training in the Greek sciences and his early career as
a teacher of grammar before he ultimately gave up his library of Greek litera-
ture and committed himself to the exclusive study and teaching of the Christian
Scriptures and its doctrines.12 Origen clearly must have known that the skills
and techniques he used to interpret the Christian Scriptures and, crucially, to
interpret them figuratively were acquirable outside of the Christian Church, at
least to some extent.
Nonetheless, in opposition to the claims of pagan polemicists that figurative
interpretation cannot be reasonably applied to the Christian Scriptures, Origen
was more than happy to make use of the figurative interpretative techniques he
learnt from his education in the Greek sciences. Whether such figurative inter-
pretation was a legitimate procedure was a question not without controversy,
both within the Church and in extra-mural discussions. Regarding the former,
we frequently find in Origen’s homilies and commentaries a man sparring
against those within his Church who ‘devote themselves to the bare letter’ of
Scripture,13 while the latter controversy is well documented in Contra Celsum
10
Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History (H.E.) 6.19.4 (SC 41, 114): Histoire Ecclésias-
tique, ed. and trans. Gustave Bardy, SC 41 (Paris, 1955).
11
Ibid. 6.19.8 (SC 41, 114-6).
12
H.E. 6.2.15-6.3.9. This portrayal is buttressed by the attacks of both Porphyry, preserved
by Eusebius, and Epiphanius, who both accused Origen of mixing Christian doctrines with his
extensive learning in Greek paideia, though they disagree on the question of to which element
this intermingling was to the detriment of. See, H.E. 6.19.5-8 (SC 41, 114-6) and Epiphanius of
Salamis, Panarion 64.72: Epiphanius II: Panarion haer. 34-64, ed. Karl Holl and Jürgen Dummer,
GCS 31 (Berlin, 1980), 523.
13
Origen, Commentary on John (C Jn.) 10.209 (SC 157, 506): Origène, Commentaire sur
Saint Jean, livres I-V, trans. and ed. Cécile Blanc, SC 120, 157, 222, 290, 385 (Paris, 1966-1992).
Also, see Origène, Homilies on Genesis (H. Gen) 6.1 (SC 7, 182-4): Origène, Homélies sur la
Genèse, ed. Louis Doutreleau, SC 7 (Paris, 1976); and Origen, Homilies on Exodus (H. Exod) 5.1
(SC 321, 150-2): Origène, Homélies sur l’Exode, ed. Marcel Borret, SC 321 (Paris, 1985); and
Origen, Homilies on Leviticus 1.1: Origen, Homélies sur le Lévitique, ed. Marcel Borret, SC 286
(Paris, 1981), I 68-70. In each of these passages, Origen urges his audience not to be satisfied
with the literal meaning of the text. While the primary motivation behind most examples of Origen
attacking his adversaries for their literal exegesis is indeed doctrinal more than it is based in
procedural issues per se, John Carl Johan Berglund is correct to suggest that one of the categories
Origen opposes in his Commentary on John is ‘those who stop at the letter’, for whom ‘literal
26 H. LINES
and Porphyry’s Adversus Christianos. Nonetheless, Origen clearly believed that

such techniques were not only justifiable but essential for the Christian exegete.
This usage could in part be legitimised by the appeal to the ultimately divine
provenance of any learning or truth found amongst the Greeks, as discussed by
Peter Martens.14 However, for such a remarkably biblically grounded thinker
as Origen, such a defence on its own would be surprisingly focussed on extra-
scriptural education. Given Origen gives a great importance to the condescen-
sion of Scripture to suit the needs of its readers, it would be surprising to find
that Origen believed the skill central to reading Scripture to be primarily one
acquired from outside the Church. Rather, it seems that Origen argues not only
that the art of figurative interpretation is appropriate for Christian use on
account of its divine provenance, but that knowledge and competency in this
art is not something that needs to be transferred from outside the Church. It is
instead an expertise that can be developed through the process of reading and
engaging with the divine Scriptures. This is not to say that such skills cannot
be learnt from secular paideia15 – Origen was a teacher of Greek grammar and
literature after all! – but simply that they need not be acquired in this way. The
Church and its writings themselves are more than adequate in the acquisition
of exegetical competence.
It is important to distinguish between claims about historical intellectual
trends and claims about the beliefs of those within such trends. When I suggest
that Origen believed his exegetical method to have its origins in Scripture, I do
not intend to make any claim about the actual trends of which Origen was a
part. It would be quite unreasonable to suggest that his method was not strongly
influenced by the developments in allegorical interpretation among Greek phi-
losophers. Thus, the suggestion that Origen considered his hermeneutics to be
scripturally based in no way disputes the fact that Origen inherited many of his
interpretations is a general habit and not limited to any particular passage’. John Carl Johan Ber-
glund, ‘Heracleon and the Seven Categories of Exegetical Opponents in Origen’s Commentary
on the Gospel of John’, Journal of Ancient Christianity 23 (2019), 228-51, 232-4.
14
See Peter Martens, Origen and Scripture: The Contours of the Exegetical Life (Oxford,
2012), 69-70. On the ultimate divine provenance of all intellection and reason, see Peri Archon
(PA) 1.1.2 (SC 252, 100): Traité des Principes, livres I et III, trans. and ed. Henri Crouzel and
Manlio Simonetti, SC 252 and 268 (Paris, 1978); and C Jn. 1.243-6 (SC 120, 180-2).
15
Origen suggests on a number of occasions that Christians can and should make use of
secular education in the pursuit of a true Christian philosophy. Most famously, Origen exhorts his
addressee Gregory to take from Greek philosophy whatever may serve as a propaedeutic for
Christianity as the Israelites spoiled the Egyptians for gold and silver when exiting from Egypt.
Elsewhere, in his thirteenth Homily on Genesis, Origen responds to those trained in secular paid-
eia who hear his figurative interpretations and believe his methods to have been plagiarised from
secular sciences. In response, Origen asserts that his usage is justified because in utilizing this
interpretative technique, Origen is infusing figurative exegesis with salvific and rational under-
standing. Gregory Thaumaturgos, Remerciement à Origène suivi de Lettre d’Origène à Grégoire,
trans. and ed. Henri Crouzel, SC 148 (Paris, 1969), 186-95; H. Gen 13.3 (SC 7, 320-2).
presuppositions and techniques from the intellectual milieu in which he was raised.
In fact, as will be seen in the consideration of his understanding of enigmatic
sayings, one of the very means by which Origen seek to base his hermeneutics
in Scripture demonstrates his indebtedness to wider intellectual trends of the
period.
Riddles and Enigmas: How Scripture signals its contents
Origen’s response to the accusation levelled against Christians that they

appropriate Greek interpretative techniques is threefold. The first, more general
response, is to emphasise the greater antiquity of the Hebrew Scripture.16 How
could Christians have stolen from Plato when their texts precede Plato by sev-
eral centuries? Just as the accusation was a common one in Christian-pagan
disputes, this was also a frequent riposte utilised by both the Christian and
Jewish apologetic traditions, upholding the antiquity of Moses and the Jewish
religion and their role in the intellectual development of Hellenistic religions
and philosophies.17 It serves to underline that Christianity is its own self-sufficient
belief system, founded upon its own inspired texts. This is no less true of the
interpretative method used within the Church.
The second response was to counterattack. It was not Christian texts, he argued,
but pagan ones which have ‘not only been imagined very simplemindedly, but
are also very impious’.18 It is not the Christian texts but the pagan ones that fail
to reach the minimum level of dignity to be worthy of figurative interpretation.
Origen, having reproached Celsus for the inconsistency in denying Christian
tales that method of interpretation which he indiscriminately admitted for pagan
myths, is himself contesting the appropriateness of interpreting his opponent’s
texts figuratively.19
Thirdly, Origen resorts to Scripture’s own words to defend the Christian use
of figurative interpretation. Origen has a number of arguments in his repertoire
that support a scriptural basis for the figurative interpretation of Scripture. For
instance, Origen had long made use of Paul’s authoritative example to justify his
16
See, for example, C. Cels. 4.11 (SC 136, 208-10); 4.21 (SC 136, 234); 4.36 (SC 136, 274);
6.13 (SC 147, 210). C. Cels. 4.36 is particularly relevant in this discussion, since Origen’s defence
of the greater antiquity of Jewish and Christian Scriptures takes place in here in the context of his
defence of the legitimacy of figurative interpretation of such Scriptures against accusations of their
vulgarity and crudeness. See L. Fernando, ‘Origen’s Use of Scripture’ (1995), 246-7; M. Simonetti,
‘La Sacra Scrittura Nel Contro Celso’ (1998), 102.
17
See Strom. 1.15.66.3 (SC 30, 98); 1.17.81.1-2 (SC 30, 109); 5.1.10.1-3 (SC 278, 40);
6.2.27.5 (SC 446, 114). Les Stromates, livres I-VII, ed. and trans. Marcel Caster et al., SC 30, 38,
463, 278, 279, 446, 428 (Paris, 1951-2001).
18
C. Cels. 4.50 (SC 136, 312).
19
M. Simonetti, ‘La Sacra Scrittura Nel Contro Celso’ (1998), 112.
28 H. LINES
own hermeneutic method.20 As an example, in the fifth of his Homilies on Exodus,

Origen begins his exegesis stating:
The Apostle Paul instructed the Church assembled from the Gentiles how one ought to
read the books of the Law, which had been received from others and which were previ-
ously unknown to them and very foreign… Therefore, for this reason, he gives some
examples of interpretation, so we might observe similar things in other places, lest we
might believe that we become disciples by imitation of the narrative and the document
of the Jews.21
Furthermore, in Peri Archon 4.2.6, making use of the same example of

1Cor. 9:9-10 as he utilises in Contra Celsum 4.49, Origen argues that Paul’s
interpretation of Deut. 25:4 demonstrates that Scripture has a psychic meaning.22
Origen made use of this long-standing justification in Contra Celsum.
Responding to Celsus’ accusation that intelligent Christians resort to figurative
interpretation to cover the shamefulness of the stories contained in their texts,
Origen states in Contra Celsum 4.44 that this is not a new development, con-
structed post hoc to explain away uncomfortable passages. Rather, Origen
claims, ‘we have received this from wise men before us,’ by which he means
Paul.23 Paul’s figurative interpretation of the story of Sarah and Hagar demon-
strates that figurative interpretation is indigenous to the Scriptures. A little
further, in Contra Celsum 4.49, Origen argues: ‘Since the founders of the doc-
trines themselves and the writers interpreted these things figuratively, what else
is one to think except that they were written with the principal purpose of being
interpreted figuratively?’24
The very form and structure of Scripture also highlights to the reader that it
needs to be approached in a figurative manner. Scripture, Origen argues, is full
of riddles and enigmas. In fact, Scripture is so full of enigmas that there is no
passage that cannot be interpreted figuratively. Again, this was a conviction
that Origen had long held and one that is once again expressed in Contra Celsum.
While Porphyry later disputed that the Christian Scriptures were enigmatic,
Origen is able to buttress his characterisation of Scripture, since Scripture char-
acterises itself in this manner.
Enigmas and riddles were understood to hold a special place in the relation-
ship between mankind and the divine in Late Antique thought. So, in Plato’s
Apology for Socrates, Socrates puzzles over words of the Delphic oracle. He does
not suggest that the gods are lying when they say that ‘no man is wiser than
20
Ronald Heine also demonstrates that Origen not only cited examples of Pauline exegesis to
justify his interpretative method, but that there was a nexus of key verses from the Pauline Epistles
that formed the core of Origen’s conception of the Christian interpretative task. See Ronald Heine,
‘Gregory of Nyssa’s Apology for Allegory’, Vigiliae Christianae 38 (1984), 360-70.
21
H. Exod 5.1 (SC 321, 148).
22
PA 4.2.6 (SC 268, 318-20).
23
C. Cels. 4.44 (SC 136, 298).
24
Ibid. 4.49 (SC 136, 310).
Socrates’, but seeks to find the hidden meaning of what he believes to have
been spoken in riddles (αἰνίττεται).25 Whether or not this is grounded in the
historical reality of the nature of oracular sayings, it certainly came to maintain
a strong hold on the common conception of oracular revelation.26 The σύμβολα
of the Pythagoreans provide another important point of comparison, since,
although primarily consisting of practical rules, these words of the revered
and holy Pythagoras came to be predominantly regarded as αἰνίγματα which
needed to be interpreted figuratively in order to understand their hidden wis-
dom, especially following Androcydes’ On Pythagorean Symbols, probably in
the first century BCE.27
The importance given to the riddling and the enigmatic in divine matters was
no less present amongst Christian writers in this period. Frances Young high-
lights what she describes as ‘the paradoxical idea that God’s revelatory Word
is indirect’ as a point of commonality between the likes of Origen and Greek
philosophical writers of the period.28 As an example, Clement of Alexandria
writes: ‘Therefore, all barbarians and Greeks who have spoken of the divine
have concealed the first principles of things, and have handed down the truth
in enigmas, in symbols, in allegories, in metaphors, and in tropes. Of this sort
are the oracles among the Greeks’.29
There were two principle reasons for this concept of indirect revelation. The
first is the incommensurability of human language and divine or noetic truths.30
Since human language is necessarily an inadequate vessel for conveying the
truths revealed by God or the gods, these things can only be revealed indirectly
– the words acting as signs towards the truths, not delivering them wholesale.31
The second reason is that the enigmatic form required that the recipient of
25
Plato, Apology 21B; Euthyphro; Apology; Crito; Phaedo, ed. and trans. Chris Emlyn-Jones
and William Preddy (Cambridge, MA, 2017), 121.
26
On the question of whether oracles were in fact delivered in enigmatic or riddling forms,
for the argument that they were not, see Frederick Naerebout and Kim Beerden, ‘“Gods Cannot
Tell Lies”: Riddling and Ancient Greek Divination’, in Jan Kwapisz, Mikolaj Szymanski and
David Petrain (eds), The Muse at Play: Riddles and Wordplay in Greek and Latin Poetry (Berlin,
Boston, 2012), 121-47. For the opposing position, see Sarah I. Johnston, Ancient Greek Divination
(Oxford, 2008), 51-6; Robert Parker, ‘Greek States and Greek Oracles’, in Richard Buxton (ed.),
Oxford Readings in Greek Religion (Oxford, 2000), 76-108.
27
See Walter Burkert, Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism (Cambridge, MA, 1972),
174-5; Leonid Zhmud, Pythagoras and the Early Pythagoreans (Oxford, 2012), 192-3.
28
Frances Young, ‘Riddles and Puzzles: God’s Indirect Word in Patristic Hermeneutics’, SP 91
(2017), 149-55.
29
Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis (Strom.) 5.4.21.4 (SC 278, n. 60).
30
See C. Cels. 6.3-5 (SC 147, 182-90); Plato, Seventh Epistle 7.341C-D, 182-90: Timaeus;
Critias; Cleitophon; Menexenus; Epistles, ed. and trans. Robert Gregg Bury (Cambridge, MA,
2014), 5390.
31
Thus, what Frances Young refers to as the ‘paradoxical idea that God’s revelatory Word is
indirect’ is closely connected to what Blossom Stefaniw calls ‘the paradox of written revelation’.
F. Young, ‘Riddles and Puzzles’ (2017), 149; B. Stefaniw, Mind, Text, and Commentary (2010),
198.
30 H. LINES
divine revelation make moral, intellectual, and spiritual progress before under-
standing the deeper truths of God and creation, ensuring such knowledge would
not be profaned by the wicked or ignorant.32
Proverbs 1:6, ‘He will know parables and dark sayings, the words of the wisdom
and enigmas’, provided Origen with a key verse with which to provide scrip-
tural authority to his characterisation of the Christian Scriptures as enigmatic
and riddling.33 In so doing, Origen was able to position the Christian Scriptures
within this wider discourse of indirect revelation, and thus make certain claims
about its contents and the ways in which it needed to be approached. Origen
makes references to this verse in discussions of wisdom and figurative inter-
pretation in Contra Celsum34 – wisdom and figurative readings of Scripture
being closely connected in Origen’s thought.35 So, Origen states in Contra
Celsum 3.45: ‘The gospel thus wishes for wise men among its believers, and so,
in order to train the intelligence of its listeners, it has spoken things in enigmas,
some things in what are called dark sayings, some by parables, and others by
problems’.36 And a little earlier, Origen says: ‘And Solomon, when he asked
for wisdom, was approved. And you may see the traces of his wisdom in his books,
which contain grand thoughts in concise sayings’.37 In both these statements,
Origen draws a close connection between wisdom and Scripture’s literary
forms. Thus, the literary forms in which Solomon and other inspired writers
expressed themselves indicates to the reader that his words contain certain
contents that require a certain method of interpretation.
Origen makes use of the same verse of Proverbs to make a very similar point
in the context of the pedagogic role of the book of Proverbs in the prologue of
his Commentary on the Song of Songs. Here, Origen states that Solomon, know-
ing that ‘there are diverse figures of speech and various types of expressions in
the divine words’, such as parables, obscure speech, enigmas, and words of the
wise (Prov. 1:6), ‘sets forth the rational science clearly and plainly, and so, in
the custom of the ancients, he unfolds great and perfect meanings in short and
succinct sentences’.38 The ‘rational science’ contained in Proverbs is Logic, the
32
See C. Cels. 5.29 (SC 147, 88).
33
See Ibid. 3.45 (SC 136, 108); 7.10 (SC 150, 38); PA 4.2.3 (SC 268, 304-6); Origen, Com-
mentary on Romans 1.1.1 (SC 532, 141); 1.6.1 (SC 532, 173): Origène, Commentaire sur l’Épître
aux Romains, Livre I – Livre II, ed. and trans. Luc Brésard, SC 532 (Paris, 2009); Origen, Homilies
of Jeremiah 20.1 (SC 238, 250): Origène, Homélies sur Jérémie: Homélie XII-Homélie XX, trans.
and ed. Pierre Husson and Pierre Nautin, SC 238 (Paris, 2008).
34
Ibid. 3.45 (SC 136, 108); 7.10 (SC 150, 38).
35
See PA 4.2.4 (SC 268, 310-2), where Origen draws an explicit connection between the
wisdom spoken among the perfect and the spirit of Scripture.
36
C. Cels. 3.45 (SC 136, 108).
37
Ibid. 3.45 (SC 136, 108).
38
Origen, Commentary on the Song of Songs (C. Cant.), prol. 3 (SC 375, 134-6): Origène,
Commentaire sur le Cantique des Cantiques, trans. and ed. Luc Brésard and Henri Crouzel, SC 375
(Paris, 1991).
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Among the millions of human beings inhabiting the globe there is
but one two-header. Every one should see her, talk to her, hear her
sing and see her dance.
Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway.
W. L. Danley, Gen’l Pass. and Ticket Agent.
Nashville, Tenn., Oct. 20, 1892.
Conductors N., C. & St. L. Ry.:
This is to certify that Manager Smith is authorized to purchase one ticket good
for ten seats Nashville to Atlanta, in connection Millie Christine, the dual woman,
this person being included. It is customary to require but one ticket for her
passage. Kindly be governed accordingly.
W. L. DANLEY, G. P. & T. A.
Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.

office of
Division Freight and Passenger Agent.
425 Pierce St., Iowa Savings Bank Building.
Sioux City, Iowa, Sept. 30, 1895.
To Conductors:
It is customary for Millie Christine, the two headed woman, to travel on one
ticket. You will please govern yourself accordingly.
Yours truly,
E. W. JORDON, D. P. A.
The Philada. & Reading Railroad Co.

Wilkesbarre, B. Station, Jan. 22, 1893.
To Conductors:
It is customary for Millie Christine, the dual woman, to require but one ticket.
Please be governed accordingly.
S. S. CHASE, C. T. A.
Old Dominion Steamship Co.

S. S. “Jamestown,” Oct. 4, 1897.
The dual woman, Millie Christine, travels on this steamer on one ticket as one
person.
FORD KUISKENE, Purser.
Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co.

Passenger Department,
114 North Fourth Street,
St. Louis, Mo., Feb. 4, 1889.
Conductors of L. & N. R. R. and connecting lines:
This is to certify that J. P. Smith, Esq., has purchased three (3) tickets St. Louis
to Columbia, S. C., in connection with Millie Christine, the dual woman, this person
being included. It is customary to require but one ticket for her passage. Kindly be
governed accordingly.
Very truly yours,
JOHN W. MASS, D. P. A.
Central Railroad and Banking Company of Georgia.

H. M. Comer, Receiver.
Macon, Ga., Nov. 3, 1892.
Conductor No. 1:
Please be governed accordingly.
J. C. HAILL, G. P. A.
Northern Pacific Railroad Company.

Thomas F. Oakes, Henry C. Payne. Henry C. Rouse, Receivers.
Traffic Department.
I. A. Nadeau, General Agent.
Seattle, Wash., July 28, 1895.
Conductors:
Please govern yourself accordingly.
I. A. NADEAU, Gen’l Agent.
THE WONDERS OF THE WORLD.
The Pyramids first, which in Egypt are reared;

Then Babylon’s Gardens and Ramparts
appeared:
Next Mausola’s Tomb of affection and gilt,
With the famed Diana in Ephesus built,
The Colossus of Rhodes made in brass for the
sun,
And Jupiter’s Statue, by Phidias done.
Some the Tower of Pharos place next, we are
told,
Some the Palace of Cyrus, cemented with gold.
Last—but not least—is Millie Christine.
The Two-headed Nightingale, alive to be seen.
Who will sing, who will dance, who will walk on
two feet
And delight all beholders whoe’er she may
meet.
Miss Millie Christine, the eighth, has spent

nearly eight years in Europe, during which time she
visited all the principal towns and cities of England,
Russia, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Italy, Belgium,
Holland and France, and in all those countries was
honored by command from the Royalty to visit them.
Miss Millie Christine speaks English, French and
German.
Transcriber’s Note.
Variant spelling, and inconsistent hyphenation have been retained.
Some characters in this booklet did not print fully, a few did not print at all. These
have been silently corrected.
Missing opening quotation marks have been added;
opening quotation marks, printed as closing ones, are here corrected to opening
quotation marks;
superfluous periods removed;
and commas printed after abbreviations instead of periods have been corrected.
The songs are kept as printed, except the position of the name of the person
singing the next verse has been standardized to always appear above the verse.
Other changes made are:
On the opening “Eight Wonders of the World” page, in the description of the Colossus of
Rhodes, the word “the” has been removed from “against the their enemy”; in the
description of the Pyramids of Egypt “eard stone” has been changed to “hard stone”.
On page 7 the first occurrence of “cellar” was originally printed as “celler”.
On page 10 “sleepleess” has been changed to “sleepless”.
On page 16 “featurs” has been changed to “features”, and “strugle” to “struggle”.
On page 24 “zyphyrs” has been changed to “zephyrs”.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF MILLIE CHRISTINE, THE
CAROLINA TWIN ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

will be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright
in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and
distribute it in the United States without permission and without
paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General
Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if
you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the
trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the
Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such
as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and
printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in
the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright
law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this
work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase
“Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of
the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or
online at www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand,
agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to
abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using
and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for
obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms
of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by
people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There
are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™
electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and
help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this
agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms
of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with
its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it
without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg
License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute
this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project

Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different
terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain
permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on,
transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright
law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite
these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the
medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,”
such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt
data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other
medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -

Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU
AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE,
STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR
ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF
THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If

you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you
paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you
received the work from. If you received the work on a physical
medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu
of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or
entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.
If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set

forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’,
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by
the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal
tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.

Papers Presented at The Eighteenth International Conference On Patristic Studies Held in Oxford 2019 Volume 8 Origen 1st Edition M. Vinzent (Editor)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Papers Presented at The Eighteenth International Conference On Patristic Studies Held in Oxford 2019 Volume 8 Origen 1st Edition M. Vinzent (Editor)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Papers presented at the Eighteenth

International Conference on Patristic

Papers presented at the Eighteenth International

Papers presented at the Eighteenth International

Papers presented at the Eighteenth International

Papers presented at the Eighteenth International

Papers presented at the Eighteenth International

Papers presented at the Eighteenth International

Studies in the Eighteenth Century Papers Presented at

The Discoveries of Manuscripts from Late Antiquity

Papers presented at the Eighteenth International Conference

Board of Directors (2019):

Papers presented at the Eighteenth International Conference

Printed in Belgium by Peeters, Leuven

Elizabeth Ann DIVELY LAURO

Shaily Shashikant PATEL

AA.SS see ASS.

BHO Bibliotheca Hagiographica Orientalis, Brussels.

DACL see DAL

GWV Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, Offenburg.

MCom Miscelanea Comillas, Comillas/Santander.

RAM Revue d’ascétique et de mystique, Paris.

SQ Sammlung ausgewählter Quellenschriften zur Kirchen- und Dogmenge-

Constantin-Ionuț MIHAI, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Iași, Romania

Studia Patristica CXI, 1-9.

of Origen’s teaching activity, but also substantial information about Gregory’s

a matter of controversy whether the young Gregory was already committed to

same time philosophical and religious, in the light of Origen’s teachings’. 10

‘beauty of the discourses of the philosophers’, warning against ‘the splendor of

linguistic parallels can be found, for instance, in Theophilus of Antioch, who,

Studia Patristica CXI, 11-22.

375-6; H. Chadwick, introduction to Contra Celsum (1980), xiv-xv; M. Fiedrowicz, introduction

Although Origen, elsewhere in Cels., signals to deeper investigations, in his

teacher of divine mysteries.35 Origen’s gesture towards a polymorphism on the

Since Origen understands these ‘I am’ Christological titles as referring

exoterically, without explanations, to the less capable crowds outside.42 For

Origen regards the polymorphism of God’s Word in his incarnation in Jesus

Harry LINES, University of Oxford, UK

Figurative Exegesis in Contra Celsum

Studia Patristica CXI, 23-36.

Beyond simply distorting the words of Christian Scripture, however, Celsus

and Porphyry’s Adversus Christianos. Nonetheless, Origen clearly believed that

Riddles and Enigmas: How Scripture signals its contents

Origen’s response to the accusation levelled against Christians that they

own hermeneutic method.20 As an example, in the fifth of his Homilies on Exodus,

Furthermore, in Peri Archon 4.2.6, making use of the same example of

Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.

The Philada. & Reading Railroad Co.

Old Dominion Steamship Co.

Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co.

Central Railroad and Banking Company of Georgia.

Northern Pacific Railroad Company.

The Pyramids first, which in Egypt are reared;

Miss Millie Christine, the eighth, has spent

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

START: FULL LICENSE

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United