Apology for Origen 5.1–5.9

Pamphilus of Caesarea · Apology for Origen · ca. 308–310 (Rufinus's Latin about 397) · Caesarea · 7 passages

Authorship disputed: Photius (Bibliotheca 118) says Pamphilus and Eusebius wrote the six-book Apology together in prison; Jerome later argued that Eusebius alone wrote it and that Rufinus misused Pamphilus's name. Only Book 1 survives, in Rufinus's Latin (made about 397), which may be freely adapted; the Greek is lost. Rufinus's preface, in which he states his aims, is included.

Latin text: Migne, PG 17 (Latin text: Migne, Patrologia Graeca vol. 17 (1857), transcribed from library-scan OCR of the printed volume).English: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), public domain (CC0).

BothSource textEnglish

Show only the passage I followed

Chapter 5

5.1PG 17:572a–579a

in testimonium ipsis, et gentibus. Et iterum: Multi mihi dicent in illa die: Domine, Domine, nonne in nomine tuo manducavimus et bibimus, et in nomine tuo daemonia ejecimus? Et dicam illis: Discedite a me, operarii iniquitatis, nunquam vos cognovi. Quae ita quidem dicta ab eo fuissent, nec ad finem tamen ea quae praedicta sunt pervenissent, fortassis minus esse vera viderentur, nec habere aliquid auctoritatis: nunc vero cum in effectum res, quae fuerant ab eo praedictae, perveniant, cum tanta autem potestate atque auctoritate praedicta sint, manifestissime declaratur Deum vere esse, qui homo factus salutaria praecepta hominibus tradidit. Quid vero inde dicendum est quod prophetae de ipso ante praedixerint non cessaturos principes ex Juda, neque duces ex femoribus ejus, usquequo veniat ille cui repositum est, regnum scilicet, et usquequo veniat exspectatio gentium? Manifestissime enim ex ipsa historia apparet, et ex his quae hodie pervidentur, quia ex temporibus Christi ultra reges apud Judaeos non exstiterunt. Sed et omnes ambitiones Judaicae, in quibus jactantiae quamplurimum gerebant, et in quibus gloriabantur, id vel de templi decore, vel de altaris insignibus, atque omnibus illis sacerdotalibus infulis indumentisque pontificum, simul universa destructa sunt. Completa est enim prophetia quae dixerat: Per multos sedebant filii Israel sine rege, sine principe: non erit hostia, nec altare, nec sacerdotium, responsa. His ergo testimoniis utimur adversus eos qui videntur asserere de his quae in Genesi ab Jacob dicta sunt de Juda, et dicunt permanere adhuc principem ex genere Judae, istum videlicet qui gentis ipsorum princeps est, quem nominant patriarcham: nec deficere posse de semine ejus qui permaneat usque ad adventum ejus Christi quem sibi ipsi describunt. Sed si verum est quod ait propheta, quia dies multos sedebant filii Israel sine rege, sine principe, nec est sacrificium, neque altare, neque sacerdotium, et ex quo utique subversum est templum, nec hostiae offeruntur, nec altare invenitur, nec sacerdotium constat, certissimum est defecisse principem ex Juda, sicut scriptum est, et ducem ex femoribus ejus, usquequo veniat ille cui repromissum est. Constat ergo quia venit ille cui repositum est, in quo exspectatio gentium est. Quod manifeste videtur impletum de multitudine eorum qui per Christum Deo ex diversis gentibus crediderunt. Sed et in Deuteronomii cantico per prophetiam designatur pro peccatis prioris populi futura esse insensatae gentis electio: non alia utique quam haec quae per Christum facta est. Sic enim ait: Exacerbaverunt me in simulacris suis, et ego in zelo concitabo eos, in gente insipiente irritabo illos. Est ergo satis evidenter agnoscere quemadmodum Hebraei, qui Deum exacerbasse dicuntur in his qui non sunt dii, et irritasse eum in simulacris suis, irritati sunt et ipsi in zelotypiam per gentem insipientem, quam Deus elegit per adventum Christi Jesu, et discipulos ejus. Sic enim dicit Apostolus: Videte enim vocationem vestram, fratres, quoniam non multi sapientes inter vos secundum carnem, non multi potentes, non multi nobiles: sed quae stulta sunt mundi elegit Deus, et ea quae non sunt, ut ea quae erant prius, destrueret. Non ergo glorietur carnalis Israel; ita enim ab Apostolo vocatur; non, inquam, glorietur caro in conspectu Dei. Sed et de his quae in Psalmis prophetantur de Christo, quid dicendum est, in eo maxime qui superscribitur, Canticum pro dilecto, ubi refertur, quia lingua ejus calamus scribae velociter scribentis: decorus specie super filios hominum, quoniam effusa est gratia in labiis ejus? Indicium autem effusae gratiae in labiis ejus hoc est, quod brevi tempore transacto doctrinae ejus (anno enim et aliquot mensibus docuit), universus tamen orbis praedicatione ac fide pietatis ejus impletus est. Orta est ergo in diebus ejus justitia, et multitudo pacis permanens usque in finem, qui finis ablatio lunae appellata est, et dominatur a mari usque ad mare, et a flumine usque ad fines orbis terrae. Datum est autem et signum domui David. Virgo enim in ventre concepit, et peperit Emmanuel, quod interpretatur Nobiscum Deus, et impletum est quod ait ipse propheta: Nobiscum Deus: scitote, gentes, et vincimini. Victi enim nos sumus, et superati ex gentibus, et velut exuviae ejus exsistimus, qui ejus gratiae nostra colla subjecimus. Sed locus nativitatis ejus praedictus est in Michaea propheta dicente: Et tu Bethlehem, terra Juda, nequaquam exigua es in ducibus Juda: ex te enim exiet dux qui regat populum meum Israel. Sed et septimanae annorum impletae sunt usque ad Christum ducem, quas praedixerat Daniel propheta. Adest nihilominus et is qui per Job praedictus est belluam ingentem consumpturus, qui et dedit potestatem familiaribus suis discipulis calcare super serpentes et scorpiones, et supra omnem virtutem inimici, nihil ab eo nocendis. PAMPHILUS. Haec est de summis rebus, id est, de sancta Trinitate, Origenis fides, quam ex paucissimis testimoniis de quamplurimis ejus voluminibus assumptis edocuimus. Et quid tam rectum, quid tam verum, quid tam catholicum, quid certe ad instructionem omnium magis utile, vel apud istos certe ipsos qui inimica adversus eum mente desaeviunt, quid tam irreprehensibile? Et quidem in summa haec posuisse de fidei ejus documento ac probatione sufficeret, nisi etiam ad reliqua his qui eum criminantur respondere necessarium videretur. Intueamur tamen quae sint istae ipsae criminationes quae a malevolis intenduntur. Prima illa est, quod aiunt eum innatum dicere Filium Dei. Secunda, quod dicunt per prolationem, secundum Valentini fabulas, in subsistentiam venisse Filium Dei dicere. … lum Samosatenum, purum hominem, id est, non etiam Deum dicere Christum Filium Dei.

"… as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles.' And again: 'Many will say to me on that day, "Lord, Lord, did we not eat and drink in your name, and cast out demons in your name?" And I will say to them, "Depart from me, you workers of iniquity; I never knew you."' If these things had been said by him in this way, and yet what was foretold had not come to pass, they might perhaps seem less true and to have no authority; but now, since the things he foretold do come to pass, and were foretold with such power and authority, it is most plainly declared that he who was made man and handed on saving precepts to men is truly God. And what is to be said of the fact that the prophets foretold of him that rulers would not fail from Judah, nor leaders from his thighs, until he should come for whom it is laid up (that is, the kingdom), and until the expectation of the Gentiles should come? For it is most plainly evident from history itself, and from what is seen today, that from the times of Christ there have no longer been kings among the Jews. All the Jewish pomp, too, in which they took very great pride and gloried, whether in the beauty of the temple, or the splendour of the altar, and all those priestly headbands and the vestments of the high priests, has been destroyed together. For the prophecy has been fulfilled which said: 'For many days the children of Israel will sit without king, without ruler; there will be no victim, nor altar, nor priesthood, (nor) oracles.' These testimonies, then, we use against those who seem to assert, concerning the words spoken by Jacob about Judah in Genesis, that a ruler from the race of Judah still remains, namely the one who is ruler of their nation, whom they call the patriarch, and that one of his seed cannot fail who will remain until the coming of their Christ, as they themselves depict him. But if what the prophet says is true, that for many days the children of Israel will sit without king, without ruler, and there is no sacrifice, nor altar, nor priesthood; and if, since the temple was overthrown, no victims are offered, no altar is found, no priesthood stands, it is most certain that the ruler has failed from Judah, as it is written, and the leader from his thighs, until he should come to whom it was promised. It is established, then, that he has come for whom it is laid up, in whom is the expectation of the Gentiles. This is plainly seen to be fulfilled in the multitude of those from various nations who have believed in God through Christ. And in the song of Deuteronomy, too, it is signified by prophecy that, because of the sins of the former people, there would be a choosing of a foolish nation, none other, certainly, than the one made through Christ. For it says: 'They provoked me with their images, and I will stir them to jealousy; with a foolish nation I will anger them.' We can recognize quite clearly, then, how the Hebrews, who are said to have provoked God with those who are not gods and to have angered him with their images, were themselves angered into jealousy by a foolish nation, which God chose through the coming of Christ Jesus and his disciples. For so the Apostle says: 'Consider your calling, brothers: not many of you are wise according to the flesh, not many powerful, not many noble; but God chose the foolish things of the world, and the things that are not, to destroy the things that were before.' Let not carnal Israel boast, then (for so the Apostle calls it); let no flesh, I say, boast in the sight of God. And what is to be said of the things prophesied about Christ in the Psalms, especially in the one entitled 'A song for the beloved', where it is said that his tongue is the pen of a scribe writing swiftly, 'fairer in form than the sons of men, for grace is poured out on his lips'? The sign of grace poured out on his lips is this: that although the time of his teaching was short (for he taught a year and some months), yet the whole world has been filled with the preaching and faith of his religion. In his days, then, righteousness has arisen, and abundance of peace, lasting until the end, the end that is called the taking away of the moon; and he rules from sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth. A sign was given to the house of David too: for a virgin conceived in the womb and bore Emmanuel, which is interpreted, God with us; and what the same prophet says was fulfilled: 'God is with us; know it, you nations, and be overcome.' For we, from among the nations, have been overcome and conquered, and we are as his spoils, we who have bowed our necks to his grace. The place of his birth too was foretold in the prophet Micah, who says: 'And you, Bethlehem, land of Judah, are by no means least among the leaders of Judah; for from you will come forth a leader who will rule my people Israel.' The weeks of years too which the prophet Daniel had foretold have been fulfilled until Christ the leader. And he is present as well who was foretold through Job as the one who would destroy the huge beast, who also gave his familiar disciples power to tread on serpents and scorpions and over all the power of the enemy, without being harmed by it at all."

Pamphilus: This, then, is Origen's faith concerning the highest matters, that is, concerning the holy Trinity, which we have shown from a very few testimonies taken from very many of his volumes. And what is so right, what so true, what so catholic, what certainly more useful for the instruction of all, or, at least among these very men who rage against him with a hostile mind, what so blameless? Indeed it would be enough to have set these things down, in sum, as evidence and proof of his faith, if it did not seem necessary also to answer his accusers on the other points. Let us look, then, at what these very charges are that are aimed at him by the malevolent. The first is that they say he calls the Son of God unborn. The second, that they say he holds that the Son of God came into subsistence by emission, according to the fables of Valentinus. … (The third, that like) Paul of Samosata he calls Christ the Son of God a mere man, that is, not also God.

Matt 10:18 (quotation, high confidence) · Matt 7:22 (quotation, high confidence) · Matt 7:23 (quotation, high confidence) · Gen 49:10 (quotation, high confidence) · Hos 3:4 (quotation, high confidence) · Deut 32:21 (quotation, high confidence) · 1 Cor 1:26 (quotation, high confidence) · 1 Cor 1:27 (quotation, high confidence) · 1 Cor 1:28 (quotation, high confidence) · 1 Cor 10:18 (allusion, medium confidence) · 1 Cor 1:29 (quotation, high confidence) · Ps 45:1 (44:2 LXX) (quotation, high confidence) · Ps 45:2 (44:3 LXX) (quotation, high confidence) · Ps 72:7 (71:7 LXX) (quotation, high confidence) · Ps 72:8 (71:8 LXX) (quotation, high confidence) · Isa 7:14 (quotation, high confidence) · Matt 1:23 (allusion, high confidence) · Isa 8:9 (quotation, high confidence) · Mic 5:2 (quotation, high confidence) · Matt 2:6 (allusion, medium confidence) · Dan 9:24 (allusion, high confidence) · Job 40:19 (allusion, medium confidence) · Luke 10:19 (quotation, high confidence)

Notes and citation

Summary: Origen's argument from fulfilled prophecy (the end of Judah's rulers, the calling of the Gentiles, the spread of the gospel) closes Pamphilus's proof of his faith in the Trinity; Pamphilus then begins to list the charges against him.

Origen's quotation: On First Principles 4.1.2–5 (Rufinus's Latin).
In Migne this passage is printed in three columns: Rufinus's text, a new Latin translation of the surviving Greek of the same passage ("Interpretatio nova"), and notes. The scan mixes all three, line by line. Only Rufinus's text is given here; it has been sorted out by sense, and the other two columns are left out. Where the columns cut a word, the word is completed only where certain.
"He taught a year and some months": Origen's estimate of the length of Christ's ministry.
"The patriarch": the head of the Jewish community in Origen's time, held to descend from David.
The opening words of the third charge are lost at the column change ("… Paul of Samosata"); "The third, that like" gives the sense.
No public-domain English translation of the Apology exists; checked privately against a modern English translation (FOTC 120); the Latin decides.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (the scan mixes three columns here: Rufinus's text, a new Latin translation of the Greek of the same passage printed beside it by Migne (Interpretatio nova), and Migne's notes; Rufinus's text is kept and put in order by sense, the other two are dropped; obvious OCR slips corrected (e.g. nucendis → nocendis, Michma → Michaea, re- → reges at a line end); the words in testimonium are moved here from the end of the previous section; a line lost at the column change before Samosatenum is marked …): incarnatione Verbi Dei. omni et quos di- ct vecusto- quo- genere doctool ' si ges lemmate. illae est, El dies ol se eos est INTERPRETATIO summa eum potestate et_liducia docuerit Christus nunquam oraculis habentheusunt ejusxooes, quales hae sunt _: Att-reges nium illis, et gentibus. Et; _Mnlti dicent mihi iu illa die vimus, et in nomine tugbibimus, et in nomine tuo dtemonia ramini .iniquitatem. Nunquam novi eos. llaec enim verisimile erati at cum deinde evenerint quae tanta cum vere hominem factum salutarem hominibus doctrinam fuisse Christum tunc nempe defuturos principes ex, Juda situm est, regnum videlicet, et prodiissetr exspectatio nuntur, manifestum esi Christi temporibus nullos deinde tis rebus Ollin_il)_us.!titlaicis quibus gloriabantur; templo snentisopontilicis. lmpleta eat quippe prophetia iquze dicit sine principe, sine sacri/icio, sinealtari, s_in_e sacerdotio, eos qui, dum urgentur iis quae in Genesi ab Jacob ad Judam ludas astiterunt principemqui populo dominetur, neque sibi animo lingunt Christi adven-tuin. _Si_enim per dies sine .snacri/icio,‘ sine altari, sine sacerdotio, sine responsis; sacrific.ium,l_nonaltare, non sacerdotium,perspicuumest more ejus. Quoniam igitur prophetia dicii Ξ Non deficiet ueniant reposita ei , venit certe cui reposita sunt, «Exspectatur titudine gentium quae per Christum in 'Deum crediderunt. Matth. ιι, f8. " Μιῑῐίι. vu, 22, ‘25. Genes (ἆθλΕιΙίιί perperam , humilibus tradidit. ιιρυιο- ι) ex pestiitleni : anteliriedixern_nt.... neque duces de fe- _ in moribus ἠξίου.. Manifestissimum enim e1: ipsa Itistoria, et ea: his, etc.,omisso apparet. Sed omnes mss. ut .i_n_ testu: _ ’_ _ ξ Α (Ψ) Ms._R_e,;ius, apud Judwam. Caeteri mss. et edit]1 iapud Iudaeos. Non erit hostia,ctc., usque ad ista verba, et in monium ipsis, et gentibus . Et iterum : Multi mihi dicent in illa die : Domine, Domine, nonne in n.0mine tuo manducarimus et bibimus, et in nomine tuo diemonia ejecimus? Et dicam illis: Discedite a me, operarii iniquitatis, nunquam vos cognovi °'. Qua: ita quidem dicta ab eo fuissent, nec ad linem tamen ea quae praedicta sunt, pervenissent , fortassis minus esse vera viderentur, nec habere aliquid auctoritatis : nunc vero cum iu effectum res, qua: fuerant abeo prmdicta: perveniant, cum tanta autem potestate atque auctoritate przedicta sint, manifestissime declaratur Deum vere esse, qui homo factus salutaria praecepta Inomiqihus tradidit. Quid vero inde dicendum est quod proliheta: de ipso ante prazdixerint non cessaturos principes ex Juda, neque duces ex femoribus ejus, usquequo veniat ille cui repositum est, regnum scilicet, et usquequo veniat exspectatio gentium "‘l Manifestissime enim ex ipsa historia apparet, et ex his qua; hodie pervidentur, quia ex temporibus Christi ultra re- apud Judzeos non exstiterunt. Sed et oinnes ambitiones Judaica: in quibus iactantia: quamplurimum gerebaut, et in quibus gloriabantur, ‘id vel de templi decore, vel de altaris insignibus, atque omnibus illis sacerdotalibus infulis. indumentisque pontificum, simul universa destructa sunt. Completa est enim prophetia quae dixerat: Per multos sedebant filii Israel sine rege, sine principe: non erit hostia, nec altare,nec sacerdotium, responsa · .llis ergo testimoniis utimur adversus qui videntur asserere de his quae in Genesi ab Iacob dicta sunt de Juda, et dicunt permanere adhuc principem ex genere Judae, istum videlicet qui gentis ipsorum princeps, quem nominant NOVA. suam victum iri doctrinam. Itaque jure pro et praefides duceminipropter me, in testiino- :_'Domin'e, Domine, nonne infin'ominetno manduca- ejecinius ? Et dicam eis: Discedite a uie qui opetemere prolata,__nec__pr0iude veru_essc, forte olim auctoritate dicta fuerant, perspicuum est Deum tradidisse. Quid vero attinet dicere praenuntiatum et ιιιιιςεεεΔ de femore ejus, cum_venissc_t cui repogentium 7? Ex historia enim et iis quae hodie cer- Judaeornur reges exstitisse, fractis et dissipanetiipe, altari, rei divinae consueto ritu, et indu- : _Per dies multos sedebant filii Israel sine rege, sine__responsis. Quibus verbis utimur adversus dicta sunt, permanere etiamnum ex genere defuturos ex semine ejus duces usque ad eum—quem inultos sedebant filii Israel sine reqe, sine principe, ri; quo autem eversum est tcmplum, non est delecisse principem es ludas- et 'ducem de l'eprinceps ea: Inda, nec duo: defemore ejus, donec gentium. Quod et manifestum est ex mul- In Denterununni quoque cantico stultarum genlLlX, 10. Ose. ιιι, Δ. patriarcbam: nec deiicere posse de semine ejus qni permaneat usque ad adventum ejus Christi quem sibi ipsi describunt. Sed si verum est quod ait propheta, quia dies multos sedebant filii Israel sine rege, sine principe, nec est sacrificium, neque altare, neque sacerdotium, et ex quo utique subversum est templum, nec hostia: oll'eruntur, nec altare invenitur, nec sacerdotium constat, certissimum est defecisse principem ex Juda, sicut scriptum est, et ducem ex femoribus ejus, usquequo veniat ille cui repromissum est. Constat ergo quia venit ille cui repositum est, in qtto exspectatio gentium est. Quod manifeste videtur impletum de multitudine eorum qui per Christum Deo ex diversis gentibus crediderunt. Sed et in Deuteronomii cantico per propbetiam designatur pro peccatis prioris pepuli (5|) futura esse insensata: gentis electio : non alia utique quam hmc quae per Christum facta est. Sic enim ait : Exacerbaverunt me in simulacris suis, et ego in zelo concitabo eos, (5‘2) in gente insipiente irritabo illos “. Est ergo satis evidenter agnoscere quemadmodum Hebraei, qui Deum exacerbasse dicuntur in his qui non sunt dii, et irritasse eum in simulacris suis, irritati sunt et ipsi in zelotypiam per gentem insipientem, quam Deus elegit per adventum Christi Jesu, et discipulos ejus. Sic enim dicit Apostolus : Videte enim vocationem vestram, fratres, quoniam non multi sapientes inter vos secundum carnem, non multi potentes, non multi nobiles: sed quae stulta sunt mundi elegit Deus, et ea qum non sunt, ut ea quae erant prius, destrueret δ’δ’. Non et go glorietur carnalis lsrael; ita enim ab Apostolo vocatur; non, inquam, glorietur caro in conspectu Dei . Sed et dehis qum in Psalmis prephetautur de Christo, quid dicendum est, in eo maxime qui superscribitur, Canticum pro dilecto, ubi refertur, quia lingua ejus calamus scriba: velociter scribentis : decorus specie super filios hominum, quoniam effusa est gratia in labiis ejus η’.lndicium autem efl'usa: gratia: INTERPRETATIO tium propter prio_ris_p0puli peccata futura electio Jesuui faeta est. Ipsi' enim," inquit, hic'pibvb‘c'diéiuin'iii'23 elego'provocubo eos ἔρρε) qui non est populus, et ir. gente cere licet_quo pacto llebr'ati qui Deum. dicuntur *n‘l'éo' ipsum irritasse in idolis suis, '_§ttcitati sint ad aemulationem Deus per adventum Jesu Christi, et. discipulos inab NOVA. prophetice declaratur, quae non per alium quam per ἧόἷῖὲὶὶὶῖοὲυὲ, et irrita'verunt in idolis suis : stult'a irritabo illos. ’ Atque aperte omnino perspi- (ini'nbtreisi'oens ’ἐιὶι aemulationem provocarsseret in nou gente. et in gente stult'a quam elegit éjns‘fvia'éiims’ indiuiduam? ι’ἶόξιὲειὶι’,”ᾁῐιιᾶ“ἶιὸἰι 29. * Psal. xuv, 1-5. agnoscere. (ἥδ) Inter vos. Duo hac verba desunt in (fuga-Carna!“ Israel;ita_enim [aL sic enim] ab ᾼροειοίο vocatur : non, inquam; glorietur. Hec desunt in libris antea editis, et restituuntur ex T8555) Indicium anteme/fusa: gratia: in labiis ejus. Hice omittuntur in editiset'in mss. nostrisfsed restituuntur ε) oumibus codicibus librorum Περὶ ἀρχῶν, et ex Grmco, ac restituenda videntur. Deino de editi perperam, doctrina ejus di/fusa est: anno cnim, etc Mss. vero ut in testu. et eat dux qui regat populum meum Israel . Sed et septimana quas praedixerat Daniel propheta ". Adest nihilominus gentem consumpturus σθ’, qui et dedit potestatem et scorpiones, et supra omnem virtutem inimici, lNTERPliETATlO sapientes secundum carnem, non multi potentes, non multi :lat sapientes; et ignobilia et‘contentptibiliaelegit Deus et ret ; et ne_ g.l.orietur coram Deo“ qui secundum carnenrest opus est de iis'dicere quae de Christo praecinuntur in diffusa est gratia in labiis ejus. Indicium enim dimissa pore docueritlannum eiiim et menses aliqitotdocuit), ipsum_Dei cultu impletus est. orta estenim in diebus que ad consummationem, quae ablatio lupa: vocata est} nibus usque ad terminosorbis terrarum. -Dat_um est et concepit, et peperit filium, eL nomen ejus ljlmmanue'l, ait idetiiprOpheta : Nobiscum Deus :_ cognoscite, gente_s,et_' c_ti Sllllluanllos ex gentibus gratia doctrina: ejuscepit. chfgam} Et tu enim, inquit, Bel/delicat terra Juda, exibit dua: qui regat populum meum lsrael. ducem, juxta Danielem;_veuitque is qui in libro Job suis discipulis proculcandi serpentes et scorpius pot ut. nihil ab illis laedantur. υι nihil ab tllts Imitantur. Psurmws. Haec jest de summis rebus, id est, de (ζ sancta Trinitate, Origenis fides, quam ex paucissimis testimoniis de quamplunbus ejus voluminibus assumptis edocuimus. Et quid tam rectum, quid tam verum, quid tam catholicum, quid certe ad instructionem omnium magis utile, vel apud istos certe ipsos qui inimica adversus eum mente desaeviunt, quid tam irreprehensibile? Et quidem in summa haec posuisse de fidei ejus documento ac probatione sulficeret, nisi etiam (6|) ad reliqua his qui eum criminantur, respondere Psal. uxr, 7. “‘ ibid. 8. lsai,"vn,14. · Dan. ut, 24. Job tn, 8. "° Luc. ι, 19. Anno enim, etc. Anonymns auctor librorum que in ob qui ad calcem nostra; editionis, tum. Il, reperiuntur, libro ll, pag. 886, 887, ait tres annos et dimidium praedicasse Christum. Tribus namque annis, inquit, et dimidio praedicavit Dominus ᾳ baptismo usque ad passionem. Caeterum vide ηοω-96861·- Zavimusi notis libri tv Περὶ ἀρχῶν, num. 5, not. . nae. . et , pag. 160. έξῒίηεε. nostri et editi. Libri vero De princ cipiis habent doctrina pro praedicatione. Pacis praetermittitur iu editis et in pleris- 573 in labiis ejus hoc est, quod brevi tempore transacto doctrinae ejus ([56] anno enim et aliquot mensibus docuit), universus tamen orbis prtedicatione ac [ide pietatis ejus impletus est. Drta est ergo in diebus ejus iustitia. et multitudo pacis “ permanens usque iu linem, qui linis ablatio lunae appellata est, et dominatur a mari usque ad mare, et a flumine usque ad fines orbis terra: 0“. Datum est autem et signum domui David . Virgo enim in ventre concepit, et peperit Emmanuel, quod interpretatur Nobiscum Deus , ct impletum est quod ait ipse propheta : Nobiscum Deus : scitote, gentes, et vincimini . Victi enim nos sumus, et superati ex gentibus, et velut exuviae ejus exsistimus, qui ejus gratia: nostra colla subjecimus. Sed locus nativitatis ejus praedictus esi in Michma propheta dicente: Et tu Betltleltem, terra .l uda, nequaquam exigua es in ducibus Juda .' ex te enim exiet annorum impletae sunt usque ad Christum ducem, et is qui per Job praedictus est belluam infamiliaribus suis discipulis calcare super serpentes, nihil ab eo nucendis 7°. NOVA. nobiles, sed stulta mundi elegit Deus, ut confun' ea quae n_on_sunt, _ut ea quae erant prius, dest'rue' Israel, ab_Aposl0lu_caroappellatus. Quid autem Psalmis, ubi Canticum inscribit-ur pro dilecto, cujus ipse ερεεξοξιρρ ferme pra: filiis minam. ιμιόιιίᾶηι gratitein labiis'ejus hoc est, quod licet pauco temuniversus tamen orbis doctrina _ejus ei. vero per ejus justitia et abundantia pacis'permanens itset'dominatura marinusque' ad m'are,_et a flumipraetcrea signtnndomui_ David. Virgo enim peperit, quod est:l\lobiscum Deus_._ ld _impletum est-quod uincimimi, potentes, cedite. superati enim cl vi- Sed et locusnatalium ejus_pt'a'di'ctits esl_apud Minequaquam minima es in principibus Juda. Ea:- te enim _Etseptuagintahehdotnades impletae sunt usque ad Christum dicitur-ingentemcetum subegisse, et qui veris item dedit, Et omnem inimici vim ita proterendi , necessarium videretur. Intueamur tamen qua- sint istae ipsa: criminationes quae a malevolis inlenduntur. Prima illa est, quod aiunt eum innatum dicere Filium Dei. Secunda, quod dicunt per prolationem, secundum Valentini fabulas, in subsistentiam venisse Filium Dei dicere. 579 S. PAMPHILI lum Samosatenum , purum hominem , id est , non etiam Deum dicere Christum Filium Dei. → in testimonium ipsis, et gentibus. Et iterum: Multi mihi dicent in illa die: Domine, Domine, nonne in nomine tuo manducavimus et bibimus, et in nomine tuo daemonia ejecimus? Et dicam illis: Discedite a me, operarii iniquitatis, nunquam vos cognovi. Quae ita quidem dicta ab eo fuissent, nec ad finem tamen ea quae praedicta sunt pervenissent, fortassis minus esse vera viderentur, nec habere aliquid auctoritatis: nunc vero cum in effectum res, quae fuerant ab eo praedictae, perveniant, cum tanta autem potestate atque auctoritate praedicta sint, manifestissime declaratur Deum vere esse, qui homo factus salutaria praecepta hominibus tradidit. Quid vero inde dicendum est quod prophetae de ipso ante praedixerint non cessaturos principes ex Juda, neque duces ex femoribus ejus, usquequo veniat ille cui repositum est, regnum scilicet, et usquequo veniat exspectatio gentium? Manifestissime enim ex ipsa historia apparet, et ex his quae hodie pervidentur, quia ex temporibus Christi ultra reges apud Judaeos non exstiterunt. Sed et omnes ambitiones Judaicae, in quibus jactantiae quamplurimum gerebant, et in quibus gloriabantur, id vel de templi decore, vel de altaris insignibus, atque omnibus illis sacerdotalibus infulis indumentisque pontificum, simul universa destructa sunt. Completa est enim prophetia quae dixerat: Per multos sedebant filii Israel sine rege, sine principe: non erit hostia, nec altare, nec sacerdotium, responsa. His ergo testimoniis utimur adversus eos qui videntur asserere de his quae in Genesi ab Jacob dicta sunt de Juda, et dicunt permanere adhuc principem ex genere Judae, istum videlicet qui gentis ipsorum princeps est, quem nominant patriarcham: nec deficere posse de semine ejus qui permaneat usque ad adventum ejus Christi quem sibi ipsi describunt. Sed si verum est quod ait propheta, quia dies multos sedebant filii Israel sine rege, sine principe, nec est sacrificium, neque altare, neque sacerdotium, et ex quo utique subversum est templum, nec hostiae offeruntur, nec altare invenitur, nec sacerdotium constat, certissimum est defecisse principem ex Juda, sicut scriptum est, et ducem ex femoribus ejus, usquequo veniat ille cui repromissum est. Constat ergo quia venit ille cui repositum est, in quo exspectatio gentium est. Quod manifeste videtur impletum de multitudine eorum qui per Christum Deo ex diversis gentibus crediderunt. Sed et in Deuteronomii cantico per prophetiam designatur pro peccatis prioris populi futura esse insensatae gentis electio: non alia utique quam haec quae per Christum facta est. Sic enim ait: Exacerbaverunt me in simulacris suis, et ego in zelo concitabo eos, in gente insipiente irritabo illos. Est ergo satis evidenter agnoscere quemadmodum Hebraei, qui Deum exacerbasse dicuntur in his qui non sunt dii, et irritasse eum in simulacris suis, irritati sunt et ipsi in zelotypiam per gentem insipientem, quam Deus elegit per adventum Christi Jesu, et discipulos ejus. Sic enim dicit Apostolus: Videte enim vocationem vestram, fratres, quoniam non multi sapientes inter vos secundum carnem, non multi potentes, non multi nobiles: sed quae stulta sunt mundi elegit Deus, et ea quae non sunt, ut ea quae erant prius, destrueret. Non ergo glorietur carnalis Israel; ita enim ab Apostolo vocatur; non, inquam, glorietur caro in conspectu Dei. Sed et de his quae in Psalmis prophetantur de Christo, quid dicendum est, in eo maxime qui superscribitur, Canticum pro dilecto, ubi refertur, quia lingua ejus calamus scribae velociter scribentis: decorus specie super filios hominum, quoniam effusa est gratia in labiis ejus? Indicium autem effusae gratiae in labiis ejus hoc est, quod brevi tempore transacto doctrinae ejus (anno enim et aliquot mensibus docuit), universus tamen orbis praedicatione ac fide pietatis ejus impletus est. Orta est ergo in diebus ejus justitia, et multitudo pacis permanens usque in finem, qui finis ablatio lunae appellata est, et dominatur a mari usque ad mare, et a flumine usque ad fines orbis terrae. Datum est autem et signum domui David. Virgo enim in ventre concepit, et peperit Emmanuel, quod interpretatur Nobiscum Deus, et impletum est quod ait ipse propheta: Nobiscum Deus: scitote, gentes, et vincimini. Victi enim nos sumus, et superati ex gentibus, et velut exuviae ejus exsistimus, qui ejus gratiae nostra colla subjecimus. Sed locus nativitatis ejus praedictus est in Michaea propheta dicente: Et tu Bethlehem, terra Juda, nequaquam exigua es in ducibus Juda: ex te enim exiet dux qui regat populum meum Israel. Sed et septimanae annorum impletae sunt usque ad Christum ducem, quas praedixerat Daniel propheta. Adest nihilominus et is qui per Job praedictus est belluam ingentem consumpturus, qui et dedit potestatem familiaribus suis discipulis calcare super serpentes et scorpiones, et supra omnem virtutem inimici, nihil ab eo nocendis. PAMPHILUS. Haec est de summis rebus, id est, de sancta Trinitate, Origenis fides, quam ex paucissimis testimoniis de quamplurimis ejus voluminibus assumptis edocuimus. Et quid tam rectum, quid tam verum, quid tam catholicum, quid certe ad instructionem omnium magis utile, vel apud istos certe ipsos qui inimica adversus eum mente desaeviunt, quid tam irreprehensibile? Et quidem in summa haec posuisse de fidei ejus documento ac probatione sufficeret, nisi etiam ad reliqua his qui eum criminantur respondere necessarium videretur. Intueamur tamen quae sint istae ipsae criminationes quae a malevolis intenduntur. Prima illa est, quod aiunt eum innatum dicere Filium Dei. Secunda, quod dicunt per prolationem, secundum Valentini fabulas, in subsistentiam venisse Filium Dei dicere. … lum Samosatenum, purum hominem, id est, non etiam Deum dicere Christum Filium Dei..

Extrabiblical texts: Origen, Princ. 4.1.2–5 (Origen, On First Principles; quotation)

Topics: Christology, Trinity, Heresy, Scripture and canon

Cite (SBL): Pamphilus, Apol. Orig. 5.1 (PG 17:572a–579a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/pamphilus-apologia-origene/5-1/#p-5-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-pamphilus-apologia-origene-5-1) · Report an error

Translation: Translated by Claude from Rufinus's Latin in Migne's Patrologia Graeca 17 (scan OCR, corrections logged). No public-domain English translation exists; checked afterwards privately against a modern English translation (not reproduced), with the Latin deciding every question.

5.4PG 17:579a

Post, ista est, quae istis omnibus adversatur (caeca enim est malitia), quod dicunt eum dicere δοκήσει, id est, putative tantum, et per allegoriam, non etiam secundum ea quae per historiam referuntur, gesta esse omnia quae a Salvatore gesta sunt.

Next comes this one, which contradicts all the rest (for malice is blind): they say that he holds that all the things the Saviour did were done "in appearance", that is, only seemingly and by allegory, and not also as they are related in the history.

Notes and citation

Summary: The fourth charge: that Origen taught that Christ's deeds happened only in appearance.

"In appearance" renders the Greek δοκήσει, which Rufinus keeps and explains.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (the Greek word, misread by the OCR, restored (δοκήσει, explained in the Latin as putative tantum)): dicere,60xficg, → dicere δοκήσει,.

Topics: Christology, Heresy

Cite (SBL): Pamphilus, Apol. Orig. 5.4 (PG 17:579a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/pamphilus-apologia-origene/5-1/#p-5-4). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-pamphilus-apologia-origene-5-4) · Report an error

5.5PG 17:579a

(σι) Alia quoque criminatio est, qua asserunt enm duos Christos praedicare.

There is also another charge, by which they assert that he preaches two Christs.

Notes and citation

Summary: The fifth charge: that Origen preached two Christs.

Topics: Christology, Heresy

Cite (SBL): Pamphilus, Apol. Orig. 5.5 (PG 17:579a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/pamphilus-apologia-origene/5-1/#p-5-5). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-pamphilus-apologia-origene-5-5) · Report an error

5.6PG 17:579a

Addunt illud quoque, quod historias corporales, quae per omnem sanctam Scripturam referuntur de gestis sanctorum, penitus deneget.

They add this too: that he wholly denies the bodily histories related throughout the holy Scripture about the deeds of the saints.

Notes and citation

Summary: The sixth charge: that Origen denied the historical events narrated in Scripture.

Topics: Scripture and canon, Heresy

Cite (SBL): Pamphilus, Apol. Orig. 5.6 (PG 17:579a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/pamphilus-apologia-origene/5-1/#p-5-6). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-pamphilus-apologia-origene-5-6) · Report an error

5.7PG 17:579a–579b

Sed et de resurrectione mortuorum, et de impiorqu poenis non levi impugnant eum calumnia, velut negantem peccatoribus inferenda esse supplicia.

Concerning the resurrection of the dead, too, and the punishments of the ungodly, they attack him with no light slander, as if he denied that punishments are to be inflicted on sinners.

Notes and citation

Summary: The seventh charge: that Origen denied the resurrection and the punishment of sinners.

Topics: Eschatology, Heresy

Cite (SBL): Pamphilus, Apol. Orig. 5.7 (PG 17:579a–579b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/pamphilus-apologia-origene/5-1/#p-5-7). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-pamphilus-apologia-origene-5-7) · Report an error

5.8PG 17:579b

Quidam vero disputationes ejus, vel Opiniones, quas de anima: statu vel dispensatione disseruit, culpant.

Some find fault with his discussions or opinions on the state or ordering of the soul.

Notes and citation

Summary: The eighth charge: that Origen's views on the soul are wrong.

Topics: Heresy

Cite (SBL): Pamphilus, Apol. Orig. 5.8 (PG 17:579b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/pamphilus-apologia-origene/5-1/#p-5-8). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-pamphilus-apologia-origene-5-8) · Report an error

5.9PG 17:579b–589a

Ultima vero omnium est criminatio illa, quae cum omni infamatione dispergitur, μετενσωματὼσεως, id est, quod humanas animas in mnta animalia, vel serpentes, vel pecudes asserat transmutari post mortem,'et quod etiam ipsa: mutorum animalium anima: rationabiles sint. Quam criminationem idcirco novissimam posuimus, ut plura de libris ejus coacervantes exempla, evidentius ejus falsitas nosceretur. Si ergo bene meminimus ordinis criminationum quem supra conscripsimus, incipiamus a … ad Deum Patrem retulit hanc vocem, dicens: Quia Deus charitas est ’”. Sed rursum ex ipsa ejus Epistola proferemus et illud quod ait: Charissimi, diligamus invicem, quoniam Charitas ea; Deo est . Qui ergo dixit: Quia Deus charitas est, ipse iterum charitatem docet esse ex Deo : quam chari. tatem credo non esse alium, nisi unigenitum Filium ejus, sicut Deum ex Deo, ita charitalem ex charitate progenitum. ΡΑιιιιιιιιυς. De eisdem in quinto libro de Evangelio secundum Joannem. Onmenes. Unigenitus Filius Salvator noster, qui solus ex Patre natus est, solus natura et non adoptione Filius est. Ρλυρῐιιιυς. ltem in ipso libro. Omcexes. ‹ Unus ergo est verus Deus qui solus liabet immortalitatem, lucem habitat inaccessibilem “'1‘. Unus et verus Deus, ne scilicet multis veri Dei nomen convenire credamus. lta ergo et hi qui accipiunt spiritum adoptionis filiorum, in quo clamamus, Abba, Pater , filii quidem Dei sunt, sed non sicut unigenitus Filius. Unigenitus enim natura Filius, et semper, et inseparabiliter Filius est: caeteri vero pro eo quod susceperunt in se Filium Dei, potestatem acceperunt Filii Dei fieri. Qui licet non ex sanguine, neque ea: vt‘fiuntatc carnis, neque ea: voluntate viri, sed ea: Deo nati sint π’, non tamen ea nativitate sunt nati, qua natus est unigenitus Filius. Propter quod quantam dill‘erentiam verus Deus habet ad eos quibus dicitur: Ego dixi : Dii estis , tantam dilferentiam habet verus Filius ad eos qui audiunt : Filii Επειδί omnes . 9 PAMPHILUS. De libris Epistola: ad llehrzeos, quomodo ὁμοούσιος est cum Patre Filius, id est, unius cum Patre substantite, alienus autem a substantiis creaturae. Omcenes. Interrogamus igitur eos quos piget confiteri Deum esse Filium Dei, quomodo poterat sola humana natura nihil in se habens eximium, neque aliquid divina: substantiae, luereditatem capere omnem principatum, et omnem potestatem, et virtutem, et his omnibus praeferri ac praeponi a Patre. Unde rectum videtur quod prtestantior esse debeat is qui btereditatem capit, et genere utique, 'et specie, et substantia, et subsi- . stentia vel natura, atque omnibus quibusque modis debet esse praestantior. Ριιιριιιιυε. Et post pauca in eodem libro : ORIGENES. t Cum autem discutitur hoc quod dictum est de Filio Dei, quod sit splendor gloria: ", necessario videtur simul disserendum et illud quod dictum est, non solum quia splendor est lucis a'ternte τυ. sed et quod huic simile in Sapientia Salomonis refertur, in qua seipsam Sapientia de. scribit dicens: Vapor est enim ivirtutis Dei, et aporrlttea gloria: Omnipotentis purissima . s Pnrniws. Et post aliquanta: Oaicssss. ‹ Oportet autem scire nos quia per inefl‘abilia quaedam et secreta ac recondita quemdam modum sibi iaciens Scriptura sancta conatur hominibus indicare et intellectum suggerere subtilem. Vaporis enim nomen inducens, hoc ideo de rebus corporalibus assumpsit, ut vel ex tarte aliqua intelligere possimus quomodo Christus, qui est Sapientia, secundum similitudinem ejus vaporis qui de substantia aliqua corporea prosedit, sic etiam ipse ut quidam vapor esoritur de virtute ipsius Dei : sic et Sapientia ex eo procedens, ex ipsa substantia Dei generatur: sic nihilominus et secundum similitudinem corporalis aporrhteze, esse dicitur aporrhma gloria: Omnipotentis pura quaedam et sincera. Quae utrasque similitudines manifestissime ostendunt communica nem substantiae esse Filio cum Patre. Aporrhtea enim ὁμοούσιος videtur, id est, unius substantiae cum illo corpore ex quo est vel aporrhoea, vel … Superest ut et secunda! criminationi illatae sibi ab accusatoribus, per nos quidem prolatis sed Suis verbis ipse respondeat, duobus vel tribus testiinoniis adhibitis, quibus aequum est secundum legem nostram omne verbum stare π’. RESPONSIO AD SECUNDAI CBIMINATIONEM. Quod non per prolationem natum dicat esse Filium Dei secundum Valentini impietatem. Omcsues. Ego arbitror quod sufficere debeat voluntas Patris ad subsistendum hoc quod vult Pater. Volens enim non alia via utitur, nisi quae consilio voluntatis profertur. lta ergo et ab eo Filii subsistentia generatur: quod necesse est in primis suscipi abhis qui nihil ingenitum, id est innatum, printer solum Deum Patrem fatentur. Observandum namque est ne quis incurrat in illas ahsurdas fabulas eorum qui prolationes quasdam sibi ipsis depingunt, ut divinam naturam in partes vocent, et Deum Patrem, quantum in se est, dividant, cum hoc de incorporea natura vel leviter suspicari non solum extremm impietatis sit, verum etiam ultima: insipientia, nec omnino vel ad intelligentiam consequens, ut in» corporea: natura: substantialis divisio possit intelligi. Magis ergo sicut voluntas procedit e mente, et neque partem aliquam mentis secat, neque ab ea separatur aut dividitur, tali quadam specie putandus est Pater Filium genuisse, imaginem scilicet suam : ut sicut ipse est invisibilis per naturam, ita imaginem quoque iuvisibilem genuerit. Verbum enim est Filius, et ideo nihil in eo sensibile intelligendum est. Sapientia est, et in Sapientia nihil corporeum suspicandum est. Lumen est verum quod illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum , sed nihil habet commune … et invisibilis sit, et inseparabilis a Filio, non per prolationem ab eo, ut quidam putant, generatus est Filius. Si enim prolatio est Filius Patris, prolatio vero dicitur qua: talem significat generationem, qualis animalium vel hominum solet esse progenies, necessario corpus est et is qui protulit, et is qui prolatus est. PAMPHILUS. Tum deinde in consequentibus vehementius adversum Valentini haeresim talia describentem invectus, longe his contrariam suam sententiam secundum catholicas lidei protulit veritatem. Ex secundo libro secundum Joannem de his ipsis. ORIGENES. Unigenitus ergo Deus Salvator … nisi ipse solus ", his quos ad eum Pater caelestis altraxerit'". Paunnttus. Sufliciat per haec respondisse secundae criminationi. Nunc consequenter respondebimus ctiam his qui purum hominem, id est, sine Deo, ab eo dici asserunt Christum. RESPONSIO AD TERTIA“ CRIIINATIONEI. Quod non purus homo, sed diuina’ natura? sit Christus. [De primo libro Epistolis: ad Galatas.] ORIGENES. Ex eo quod dixit Apostolus: Paulus apostolus non ab hominibus, neque per hominem, sed per Iesum Christum , manifeste intelligi datur, quia non erat homo Iesus Christus, sed erat divina natura. Non enim, si homo esset, dixisset Paulus hoc quod ait : Paulus apostolus non ab hominibus, neque per hominem. Si enim homo fuit Iesus, et per ipsum assumptus est in apostolatum Paulus, utique per hominem erat apostolus factus. Si autem per hominem erat apostolus, nunquam dixisset, quia neque per hominem .' sed manifeste separat ab humana natura Iesum Paulus per haec verba. Non enim sullicit ei dixisse : Neque per hominem; sed adjecit dicens ιδιά per Iesum Chrislum. Quem utique quia sciebat excellentioris esse naturae, propterea dixit se non assumptum esse per hominem. PAMPHILUS. llaec in initio Epistolas dicens, in sequentibus libri ipsius similia adjecit, exponens illud capitulum in quo scriptum est : Notum autem vobis facio, fratres, Evangelium quod prwdisam vobis , quoniam non est secundum hominem : neque enim ego ab homine accepi illud, sed per revelationem Iesu Christi . Οιιιεειιεε. t Adverte ergo quid scribit, quia convenienter quis et haec adjungens prioribus, intelligere poterit et ostendere his qui negant deitatem Iesu Christi, sed hominem eum solum pronuntiant, quod non est homo, sed Deus, Dei Filius Iesus Christos. Sic enim dicit Apostolus , quia Evangelium quod euangelizaui vobis, non est secundum hominem, sed secundum Jesum Christum. Evidenter ergo ostendit quia Christus .lesus non est homo: si autem non est homo , sine dubio Deus est; imo non aliud erit, nisi Deus et homo. Et iterum si verum est quod dicit Paulus , quia non ab homine accepit Evangelium, sed per reuelationem Jesu Christi, certum est quia Jesus Christus qui revelavit. plus quam homo est. Alienum enim est ab homine revelare quae in occulto sunt, et velata sunt: quod etiam si aliquando per hominem fiat, non tamen ab homine fit, sed ab eo qui in homine loquitur Christus. Pupaiws. Tempus est his ita evidenter ostensis, nos etiam ad insequentis criminationis tendere defensionem, brevitatis studio paucorum testimoniorum probatione contentos. BESPONSIO AD ρυΑιιτΑκ CRIIINATIONEI. Adversum eos qui dicunt eum per allegorias … omnia quae a Salvatore scripta sunt corporaliter acta. ORIGENES. «Adjungendum est etiam illud bis quae supra diximus, quoniam corpus Christi non erat alienum a terrena substantia secundum hoc quod filius est David, et filius Abraham, sicut scribit )latthzeus : Liber generationis Iesu Christi, filii David , filii .Abraham 7’ : et sicut Paulus dicit, Christum esse ex semine Abrahae · et ex semine David '° secundum carnem. Quod ergo dictum est, quia, consummatis quadraginta diebus jejunii, et quadraginta noctibus, postea esuriit °°', sine dnbio hoc indicat, quod evacuari et repleri, similiter ut nostra corpora solent, etiam illius poterat corpus. Si vero quis objiciat nobis hujus miraculi rationem de quadraginta dierum jejunio; facile solvi potest. cum adhibetur etiam illud exemplum de Moyse ". et Elia 3“, qui similiter pertulisse jejunium referuntur. Sed et illud, quod itineris et testas labore fatigatus sedens super puteum requiescit, et sitit“, quid aliud indicat, nisi nervorum fatigatione , et solis ardore nimio elementum corporci humoris absumptum? Quod vero in melioribus occupatus, hoc quod bibere voluerat distulit,nec bibit, non propterea dicendum est quia neque passus est sitim. Sed et illud quod frequenter per cmnas vocatur, et in conspectu omnium manducat,et bibit, non decipiens vel fallens oculos videntium facit, neque putative, ut quidam arbitrantur, haec gerit, maxime cum ita sumeret cibum ac potum, ut a quibusdam etiam quasi pro praesumptione nimia culparetur, velut cibum ac potum propensius appetens. Si autem quis violentius velit asserere ideo hinc dicta esse, quia per phantasiam manducabat, et illi quomodo htec fierent nesciebant, respondendum est ad ea ex his quae ipse Dominus dixit : Venit Joannes Baptista neque manducaris, neque bibens, et dicunt : Darnionium habet. Venit Filius hominis manducans et bibens, et di« cunt : Ecce homo devorator et vinum bibens . Ipso enim Salvatore dicente quia venit Filius hominis manducone et bibens, quomodo ausus est aliquis dicere. neque manducasse eum, neque bibisse? Quae utique manifesta incredulitas est doctrina! ejus. Si autem manducabat, et bibebat, et substantia vini atque esca: in carnem ejus efliciebatur, sine dubio per omnes corporis ejus compages ac membrorum perplexiones diffundebatur. Spiritalem enim naturam (sicut quidam de ejus corpore sentiunt, quod imperite satis et absurde faciunt) impossibile est vini atque esca: recipere substantiam. Si vero quis indignas obscenasque au haec proferat inquisitiones, requirens si etiam digestioues in corpore hebant, nihilabsurdum videtur fateri secundum consequentiam natura: corporeae. Si vero etiam exemplis a nobis bare exigant allirmari, ostendendum est illos satis haec insipienter inquirere. Ubi enim ista vel de apostolis, vel dc eteteris sanctis facta esse referuntur, vel etiam de impiis et peccatoribus, ex abundanti de eo requiritur. Sed et circumcisionis ejus ratio nobis quidem (l) non generabit angustiam, dicentibus eum consequenter humano corpore et circumcisum esse, et praeputium ejus terrae mandatum, fortassis usque ad tempus : aut si aliter est, in alia disputatione requiretur. Haec tamen ejus circumcisio satis coangustablt eos qui ex diverso sunt. Spiritale enim . corpus quomodo poterat circumcidi ferro terreno? Propter quod non erubuerunt quidam ex ipsis de praeputio circumcisionis ejus etiam libros edere, quibus ostendere conarentur quod in substantiam cesserit'Spiritalem. Non minus autem angustabuntur etiam illi qui animale corpus dicunt esse corpus Christi. Sed et de sanguine ejus et aqua quae processit de latere ejus hasta compuncto a milite , eadem sentienda’ sunt. Sed his qui sciunt quid audiant per hoc quod dicitur, quia fixum clavorum erant in ejus corpore “, manifeste declaratur quia caro erat terrena, id est humanae naturae: quae utique non erat talis, ut recipiendorum vulnerum subterfugeret qualitatem. Quod si non etiam multa humanae infirmitatis in ipsa morte sensisset, cur anima ipsius perturbatur , et tristis est pro ea usque ad mortem. Quae omnia evidenter ostendunt quod non falso, sed quasi homo dixerit: Spiritus quidem promptus est, caro autem infirma . Eadem nihilominus ostendit etiam somni ratio, cum dicitur, quia erat in puppi super cervical dormiens , sicut Marcus refert , et ab homine suscitatur e somno. Haec enim licet habeant spiritalem intellectum, tamen manente prius historia: veritate, etiam spiritalis recipiendus est sensus. (ὅ) Licet enim caecos semper curet secundum … inclinare aures his qui dicunt per Mariam, et non es Maria eum esse natum: quod Apostolus praasciens ita praedixit: Cum autem venit plenitudo temporum, misit Deus Filium suum factum es muliere, factum sub lege, ut eos qui sub lege erant redimeret “. Vides quia non dixit, factum per mulierem, sed, factum ea; muliere. Passennus. Quid tam evidenter aut integre, quant ex bis omnibus quas scripsit, confirmatur? Conlirmatur ab eo et Dominicorum gestorum reritas. et historiae Scripturarum fides. Sed persequamur consequenter etiam alia, in quibus actu. satur quasi duos Christos dicens, unum Deum Verbum, et alium Jesum Christum qui ex Maria natus. RESPONSIO AD QUINTAI CRIIINATIONEI. Quod unus est Christus Filius Dei. (Ex primo libro de Isaia.) ORIGENES. ‹ Sicut dicit Apostolus, Quoniam aemulatores estis spirituum ’. Sicut enim cum unus sit Spiritus sanctus, tanti per singulos dicuntur spiritus sancti, quanti sunt hi qui habent in se Spiritum sanctum : ita et de Christo dicendum est. Ab uno enim Christo multi fiunt christi, de quibus Scriptura dicit: Nolite tangere christos meos , et in prophetis meis nolite malignari". Sic etab uno Deo dii multi dicuntur, omnes scilicet hi in quibus habitat Deus : sed nobis unus est Dm Pater, ex quo omnia . Unus ergo est verus Deus, qui, ut ita dixerim, praestator est deitatis, et unm Christus factor christorum , et unus Spiritus … facit christos. Adhibcamus tamen et aliud ex primo libro de Evangelio secundum Matthaeum, in quo hoc modo dicit: ORIGENES. Si Christus Iesus, cum in forma esset Dei, non rapinam arbitratus est esse se (equalem Deo, sed semetipsum exinanivit formam servi accipiens, et in similitudinem hominum factus, habitu repertus ut homo est, humilians seipsum, [actus obediens usque ad mortem, mortem autem crucis , dubium non est quod nativitas ejus non est talis, ut quasi qui ante non fuerit, esse coeperit, sicut de nativitate hominum putatur : sed qui prius erat, et erat in forma Dei, (ίῦ) venit etiam formam servi suscipere. Denique quod natum est ea: carne, caro est θ’, inquit. Quod natum est, id est, ex ea qua dixit : Ecce ancilla Domini, fiat mihi secundum verbum tuum : huic est forma servi, quae utique caro est. , Psurmws. Et in tertio libro Epistolze ad Colossenses de eisdem ita scribit. Onrcsues. (l l) Data est autem lex Moysi per angelos in mauu et virtute Mediatoris Christi’, qui cum esset in principio Verbum Dei, et apud Deum esset, et Deus esset Verbum Patri in omnibus ministra. vit. Omnia enim per ipsum [acta sunt , id est non solum creaturae, scd et lex et prophetazzet ipse est mediator Dei et hominum.

The last charge of all is the one spread about with every kind of infamy, that of metensomatosis: that is, that he asserts that after death human souls are changed into dumb animals, or snakes, or cattle, and that the souls of dumb animals too are rational. We have put this charge last so that, by heaping up more examples from his books, its falsity may be recognized more clearly. If, then, we remember well the order of the charges we wrote out above, let us begin with … (John) referred this word to God the Father, saying, 'God is love.' But again we will bring forward from the same Epistle of his what he says: 'Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God.' He who said 'God is love', then, also teaches that love is from God; and this love, I believe, is none other than his only-begotten Son, begotten as love from love, just as he is God from God."

Pamphilus: On the same, in the fifth book on the Gospel according to John.

Origen: "The only-begotten Son, our Saviour, who alone was born of the Father, alone is Son by nature and not by adoption."

Pamphilus: Again in the same book.

Origen: "There is, then, one true God, who alone has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light: one and true God, so that we may not believe that the name of true God belongs to many. So also those who receive the spirit of adoption as sons, in which we cry, 'Abba, Father', are indeed sons of God, but not as the only-begotten Son is. For the Only-begotten is Son by nature, and always and inseparably Son; but the others, because they have received the Son of God into themselves, have received power to become sons of God. Although they were born not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but of God, yet they were not born with the birth by which the only-begotten Son was born. Therefore, as great as the difference is between the true God and those to whom it is said, 'I said, You are gods', so great is the difference between the true Son and those who hear, 'You are all sons of the Most High.'"

Pamphilus: From the books on the Epistle to the Hebrews: how the Son is homoousios with the Father, that is, of one substance with the Father, but foreign to the substances of the creature.

Origen: "We ask, then, those who are reluctant to confess that the Son of God is God, how a merely human nature, having nothing exceptional in itself and nothing of the divine substance, could take as its inheritance every principality and every power and might, and be preferred and set above all these by the Father. Hence it seems right that the one who takes the inheritance should be more excellent: more excellent in kind, in form, in substance, in subsistence or nature, and in every way whatever."

Pamphilus: And after a little, in the same book:

Origen: "When what is said of the Son of God, that he is the radiance of glory, is discussed, it seems necessary to discuss at the same time not only what is said, that he is the radiance of eternal light, but also what is related like it in the Wisdom of Solomon, where Wisdom describes herself, saying: 'For she is a vapour of the power of God, and a most pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty.'"

Pamphilus: And after a while:

Origen: "We must know that holy Scripture, making for itself a way, as it were, through certain inexpressible, secret, and hidden things, tries to point them out to men and to suggest a subtle understanding. When it brings in the word vapour, it has taken it from bodily things so that we may understand at least in part how Christ, who is Wisdom, arises as a kind of vapour from the power of God himself, after the likeness of the vapour that comes forth from some bodily substance; so too Wisdom, proceeding from him, is begotten from the very substance of God; and so too, after the likeness of a bodily emanation, he is called a pure and unmixed emanation of the glory of the Almighty. Both these likenesses show most plainly that the Son shares the substance of the Father. For an emanation seems homoousios, that is, of one substance, with that body of which it is the emanation or …"

… It remains that he himself answer the second charge brought against him by the accusers, in words brought forward by us but his own, with two or three testimonies adduced, on which, according to our law, it is right that every word should stand.

Response to the second charge: That he does not say that the Son of God was born by emission, according to the impiety of Valentinus.

Origen: "I think that the will of the Father should be enough for what the Father wills to subsist. For in willing he uses no other way than that which is brought forth by the counsel of his will. So, then, the subsistence of the Son is begotten from him. This must be accepted above all by those who confess that nothing is unbegotten, that is, unborn, except God the Father alone. For care must be taken that no one fall into the absurd fables of those who picture for themselves certain emissions, so as to divide the divine nature into parts and, as far as in them lies, to divide God the Father; whereas even lightly to suspect this of an incorporeal nature is not only the height of impiety but also the extreme of folly, nor is it at all consistent, even for understanding, that a substantial division of an incorporeal nature could be conceived. Rather, then, as the will proceeds from the mind, and neither cuts off any part of the mind nor is separated or divided from it, in some such way the Father must be thought to have begotten the Son, his image: so that, as he himself is invisible by nature, he also begot an invisible image. For the Son is the Word, and therefore nothing perceptible to the senses is to be understood in him. He is Wisdom, and in Wisdom nothing bodily is to be suspected. He is the true light, which enlightens every man coming into this world; but he has nothing in common … is both invisible and inseparable from the Son, the Son was not begotten from him by emission, as some think. For if the Son is an emission of the Father, and 'emission' signifies the kind of begetting that the offspring of animals or men usually is, then both he who emitted and he who was emitted are necessarily bodies."

Pamphilus: Then, in what follows, inveighing more vehemently against the heresy of Valentinus, which describes such things, he set out his own opinion, far opposed to theirs, according to the catholic truth of the faith. From the second book on John, on these same things:

Origen: "The only-begotten God, then, our Saviour … except he alone, to those whom the heavenly Father has drawn to him."

Pamphilus: Let this suffice as an answer to the second charge. We will now answer, next, those who assert that he calls Christ a mere man, that is, without God.

Response to the third charge: That Christ is not a mere man but of divine nature. [From the first book on the Epistle to the Galatians.]

Origen: "From the Apostle's saying, 'Paul, an apostle not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ', it is plainly given us to understand that Jesus Christ was not a man, but was of divine nature. For if he were a man, Paul would not have said, 'Paul, an apostle not from men nor through man.' For if Jesus was a man, and Paul was taken into the apostleship through him, then he was made an apostle through a man; and if he was an apostle through a man, he would never have said, 'nor through man.' By these words Paul plainly separates Jesus from human nature. For it was not enough for him to say, 'nor through man'; he added, 'but through Jesus Christ'. He said that he had not been taken up through a man because he knew that Jesus Christ was of a more excellent nature."

Pamphilus: Having said this at the beginning of the Epistle, he added similar things later in the same book, explaining the passage in which it is written: 'I make known to you, brothers, the gospel that was preached by me, that it is not according to man; for I did not receive it from man, but through the revelation of Jesus Christ.'

Origen: "Notice, then, what he writes; for one who adds these words to the earlier ones will be able to understand, and to show those who deny the deity of Jesus Christ and declare him only a man, that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is not a man but God. For the Apostle says that the gospel he preached is not according to man but according to Jesus Christ. Plainly, then, he shows that Christ Jesus is not a man; and if he is not a man, without doubt he is God; or rather, he will be nothing other than God and man. And again, if what Paul says is true, that he did not receive the gospel from man but through the revelation of Jesus Christ, it is certain that Jesus Christ, who revealed it, is more than a man. For it is beyond a man to reveal what is hidden and veiled; and even if this is sometimes done through a man, it is not done by the man but by Christ, who speaks in the man."

Pamphilus: Now that these things have been so plainly shown, it is time for us to move on to the defence against the next charge, content, for brevity's sake, with the proof of a few testimonies.

Response to the fourth charge: Against those who say that he … by allegories all the things written of the Saviour as done bodily.

Origen: "To what we said above this too must be added: that the body of Christ was not foreign to earthly substance, inasmuch as he is son of David and son of Abraham, as Matthew writes, 'The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham', and as Paul says that Christ is of the seed of Abraham and of the seed of David according to the flesh. The saying that, when the forty days and forty nights of fasting were completed, he was afterwards hungry, without doubt indicates that his body too could be emptied and filled, as our bodies usually are. And if anyone objects to us the explanation of this miracle of the forty days' fast, it is easily answered by adducing the example of Moses and of Elijah, who are related to have endured a similar fast. And that, wearied by the toil of the journey and by the heat, he sat on the well to rest and was thirsty: what else does it show than that, through the fatigue of the sinews and the excessive heat of the sun, the element of bodily moisture had been used up? That, occupied with better things, he put off the drink he had wanted and did not drink, is no reason to say that he did not suffer thirst. That he is often invited to dinners and eats and drinks in the sight of all, he does not do to deceive or cheat the eyes of those who see him, nor does he do these things in appearance, as some think; especially since he took food and drink in such a way that he was even blamed by some, as if for excessive presumption, as one who sought food and drink too eagerly. But if anyone wants to maintain, more forcefully, that these things were said because he ate in appearance and they did not know how these things happened, he must be answered from what the Lord himself said: 'John the Baptist came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He has a demon. The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, Look, a glutton and a wine-drinker.' Since the Saviour himself says that the Son of Man came eating and drinking, how has anyone dared to say that he neither ate nor drank? That is plain unbelief in his teaching. But if he ate and drank, and the substance of the wine and food was turned into his flesh, without doubt it was spread through all the joints of his body and the windings of his limbs. For it is impossible for a spiritual nature (as some think his body was, which they do quite ignorantly and absurdly) to receive the substance of wine and food. And if anyone brings forward unworthy and indecent inquiries, asking whether digestion too took place in his body, it does not seem absurd to admit it, in keeping with bodily nature. And if they demand that this be affirmed by us with examples too, it must be shown that they ask these things quite foolishly. For where are such things related as happening, whether of the apostles or of the other saints, or even of the ungodly and sinners, that they should be required, beyond what is needed, of him? The matter of his circumcision, too, will cause us no difficulty, since we say that, consistently with a human body, he was circumcised and his foreskin was committed to the earth, perhaps until a certain time; or, if it is otherwise, it will be inquired into in another discussion. His circumcision, however, will press hard on those of the opposite view. For how could a spiritual body be circumcised with earthly iron? For this reason some of them were not ashamed even to publish books about the foreskin of his circumcision, in which they tried to show that it passed into a spiritual substance. Those too who say that the body of Christ was a body of soul will be no less hard pressed. And the same must be held about his blood and the water that came out of his side when it was pierced with a lance by the soldier. But for those who know what they hear, the saying that the print of the nails was in his body plainly declares that his flesh was earthly, that is, of human nature, which certainly was not such as to escape the property of receiving wounds. And if he had not felt many things of human weakness in death itself, why is his soul troubled and sorrowful even to death? All these things show plainly that it was not falsely, but as a man, that he said, 'The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.' The account of his sleep shows the same, when it is said that he was asleep on a cushion in the stern, as Mark relates, and is roused from sleep by a man. For although these things have a spiritual meaning, still, with the truth of the history standing first, the spiritual sense too is to be received. For although he always heals the blind according to … (do not) incline the ear to those who say that he was born through Mary and not from Mary; which the Apostle foresaw and foretold thus: 'But when the fullness of time came, God sent his Son, made from a woman, made under the law, to redeem those who were under the law.' You see that he did not say 'made through a woman', but 'made from a woman'."

Pamphilus: What could be confirmed more plainly or more completely than by all these things he wrote? He confirms both the truth of the Lord's deeds and the reliability of the history of the Scriptures. But let us go on next to the other matters, in which he is accused of speaking of two Christs, one God the Word and another Jesus Christ, born of Mary.

Response to the fifth charge: That Christ the Son of God is one. (From the first book on Isaiah.)

Origen: "As the Apostle says, 'since you are zealous for spirits.' For just as, although the Holy Spirit is one, as many are called holy spirits, one by one, as there are those who have the Holy Spirit in them, so must it be said of Christ too. For from the one Christ many become christs, of whom the Scripture says, 'Do not touch my christs, and do my prophets no harm.' So too from the one God many are called gods, namely all those in whom God dwells; but for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things. There is, then, one true God, who, so to say, is the giver of deity, and one Christ, the maker of christs, and one Spirit …"

Pamphilus: … makes christs. Let us, however, bring forward another testimony from the first book on the Gospel according to Matthew, in which he speaks thus:

Origen: "If Christ Jesus, when he was in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal to God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, and being made in the likeness of men and found in appearance as a man, humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross, there is no doubt that his birth is not such that, as one who did not exist before, he began to be, as is thought of the birth of men; but he who was before, and was in the form of God, came also to take up the form of a servant. In short, 'what is born of the flesh is flesh', it says. What is born, that is, from her who said, 'Behold the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word': to this belongs the form of a servant, which is certainly flesh."

Pamphilus: And in the third book on the Epistle to the Colossians he writes thus about the same:

Origen: "The law was given to Moses through angels by the hand and power of the Mediator, Christ, who, being in the beginning the Word of God, and being with God, and being God the Word, served the Father in all things. For all things were made through him, that is, not only the creatures but also the law and the prophets; and he himself is the mediator between God and men.

Textual problem in this passage: see the notes.

1 John 4:8 (quotation, high confidence) · 1 John 4:7 (quotation, high confidence) · 1 Tim 6:16 (quotation, high confidence) · Rom 8:15 (quotation, high confidence) · John 1:12 (allusion, high confidence) · John 1:13 (quotation, high confidence) · Ps 82:6 (81:6 LXX) (quotation, high confidence) · Heb 1:2 (allusion, medium confidence) · Eph 1:21 (allusion, medium confidence) · Heb 1:3 (quotation, high confidence) · Col 1:15 (allusion, medium confidence) · John 1:9 (quotation, high confidence) · John 6:44 (allusion, medium confidence) · Matt 11:27 (allusion, medium confidence) · Gal 1:1 (quotation, high confidence) · Gal 1:11 (quotation, high confidence) · Gal 1:12 (quotation, high confidence) · Matt 1:1 (quotation, high confidence) · Gal 3:16 (allusion, high confidence) · Rom 1:3 (allusion, high confidence) · Matt 4:2 (allusion, high confidence) · Exod 34:28 (allusion, high confidence) · 1 Kgs 19:8 (allusion, high confidence) · John 4:6 (allusion, high confidence) · John 4:7 (allusion, high confidence) · Matt 11:18 (quotation, high confidence) · Matt 11:19 (quotation, high confidence) · Luke 2:21 (allusion, medium confidence) · John 19:34 (allusion, high confidence) · John 20:25 (allusion, high confidence) · John 12:27 (allusion, medium confidence) · Matt 26:38 (allusion, high confidence) · Matt 26:41 (quotation, high confidence) · Mark 4:38 (allusion, high confidence) · Gal 4:4 (quotation, high confidence) · Gal 4:5 (quotation, high confidence) · 1 Cor 14:12 (quotation, high confidence) · Ps 105:15 (104:15 LXX) (quotation, high confidence) · 1 Cor 8:6 (quotation, high confidence) · John 17:3 (allusion, medium confidence) · Phil 2:6 (quotation, high confidence) · Phil 2:7 (quotation, high confidence) · Phil 2:8 (quotation, high confidence) · John 3:6 (quotation, high confidence) · Luke 1:38 (quotation, high confidence) · Gal 3:19 (allusion, high confidence) · John 1:1 (allusion, high confidence) · John 1:3 (quotation, high confidence) · 1 Tim 2:5 (quotation, high confidence)

Notes and citation

Summary: Pamphilus lists the last charge (transmigration of souls) and answers the first five charges with Origen's own words: the Son is born of the Father by nature, not by emission; Christ is God and not a mere man; his body was real; and there is one Christ.

The quotations are from Origen's commentaries, most of them now lost: the first book on Romans (the first quotation, whose heading is lost in the scan), books 2 and 5 on John, Hebrews, Galatians, Isaiah, Matthew, and Colossians; and from On First Principles 1.2.6 and 4.4.1 (the passage against "emission").
"Homoousios" ("of one substance") is Rufinus's Greek word here; whether Origen himself used it of the Son is disputed.
"Metensomatosis" (μετενσωμάτωσις): the passing of souls into other bodies.
Lines are lost in the scan at several page and column turns, shown as "…": the opening of the first response and of Origen's quotation ("Perhaps someone may ask whether the Son is love, especially since John …" is the sense); after "the emanation or" (the end of the quotation and the start of Pamphilus's next words); after "nothing in common"; in the quotation from book 2 on John; in the heading of the fourth response; after "he always heals the blind according to"; and after "one Spirit" (the end of the Isaiah quotation and Pamphilus's comment).
A paragraph from Migne's "Interpretatio nova" (a new Latin version of a Greek fragment of the passage against emission, beginning "It is time to repeat some things about the Father and the Son") is printed beside Rufinus's text and run into it by the scan; it is left out.
"A body of soul": the Latin animale corpus, the view that Christ's body was "psychic" rather than material (a Valentinian teaching).
No public-domain English translation of the Apology exists; checked privately against a modern English translation (FOTC 120); the Latin decides.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (Migne's footnotes and notes on readings, and the running head, printed inside the text column, removed; a stray Greek word and a paragraph of Migne's Interpretatio nova (a new Latin version of a Greek fragment, printed beside Rufinus's text) removed; speaker label corrected; an illegible verb marked …; OCR slips corrected; column number removed; footnotes and column number printed inside a word removed; lines lost in the scan at this point (the end of Origen's quotation and Pamphilus's comment) marked …; lines lost in the scan at this point marked …; OCR slip corrected; note marker removed; words separated; running head and column number removed; lines lost in the scan at the page turn (the end of Pamphilus's sentence, the heading of the first response, and the opening of Origen's quotation) marked …; running head and column number removed; lines lost in the scan at the page turn marked …; running head removed; lines lost in the scan at the page turn marked …; the first words of the next sentence moved to the next section, where the sentence continues): incipiamus a MARTYRIS 580 → incipiamus a …; ex quo est vel aporrhma, vel Superest → ex quo est vel aporrhoea, vel … Superest; commune εκ s. PAMPHILI ’-' et invisibilis → commune … et invisibilis; esse μένον. progenies, necessario corpus est et is qui protulit, et is qui prolatus est. INTERPB. NOV'A. Tempus est ut nonnulla de Patre et Filio et Spiritu saneto. repetamus, et pauca quae tunc prtrtermisimus, persequamur de Patre, qui cum in nullas partes dividi queat, Filii tamen fit Pater, non entittens illum, ut quidam putant. Nam si Filius est prolatio Patris qui illum de seipso generet ad eum modum quo de _se animalia gignunta necessario corpus est tum qui emittit, tum qui emittitur. Purutcus. → esse progenies, necessario corpus est et is qui protulit, et is qui prolatus est. PAMPHILUS.; Salvator MARTYRIS 584 gnovit nisi → Salvator … nisi; ξαάίprere {omnia qui? a Saluatore scripta sunt corpora- iter acta. → … omnia quae a Salvatore scripta sunt corporaliter acta.; JesumChristum.Evidenter(90—9l)ergo → Jesum Christum. Evidenter ergo; " Matth. ι. l. "' Galat. ιιι, 16. ο Rom. ι, 5. " Joan. iv, ὅ, 7. "‘ Matth. ιι, 18, l9. (QQ—9l)“E.rgo. Decstnin mss. sed exstat in editis. Deinde cditi, homo et Deus. Et infra, quia non ab homine accepi illud Evangeliunt; sed omnes mss. ut in nostro texui. · Ita ms. Regius. Editi (vero, non est homo. Alienum est . quae ei occulta sunt et uelata sunt (Merlinus, et revelata sunt): quod et si aliquando, etc. (lateri mss. ortiittunt, plus quam homo est, vel, non est homo, et vocem enim, post alienum: reliqua vero habent ut in textu. Alias, contentus. 94) Ex lib. in Epist. ad Galatas. 95) Alias, consumptis. Alias, quod itineris labore et azstu fatigatus. Mss. plures omittunt, uel fallens. Ms. unus, non fallens. Deinde. editi, quasi pro sumptione nimia .. . . velut cibum ac potum auidius ac propensius appetens . . . . velit afiirmare ideo haec ita esse . . . . et illi quomodo id fieret, etc. Sed omnes mss. ut in DOSlI'O textu. r)mnes mss. nostri, in carne ejus; sed me- PATaOL. Gn. XVII. 586 → ; conlatth. tv, 2. οι Exod. xxxiv, 28. ῚΙΙ lieg. ιιχ, '5. 587 scquenter → consequenter; MA RTYRIS 588 inclinare aur-sn → … inclinare aures; natus 85L → natus.; Spiritos (Η) facit → Spiritus … facit; hominum ‘. Quod Verbum → hominum. .

Extrabiblical texts: Wis 7:25 (Wisdom of Solomon [in RC, EO, ETH canons]; quotation); Origen, Princ. 1.2.6 (Origen, On First Principles; quotation); Origen, Princ. 4.4.1 (Origen, On First Principles; quotation)

Topics: Christology, Trinity, Heresy, Scripture and canon

Cite (SBL): Pamphilus, Apol. Orig. 5.9 (PG 17:579b–589a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/pamphilus-apologia-origene/5-1/#p-5-9). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-pamphilus-apologia-origene-5-9) · Report an error