Kilian McDonnell - Does Origen Have a Trinitarian Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Gregorianum, Vol. 75, No. 1. 1994..pdf

8/9/2019 Kilian McDonnell - Does Origen Have a Trinitarian Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Gregorianum, Vol. 75, No. 1. 1994..pdf

1/31

Gregorianum

75,

1

(1994)

5-35

Does

Origen

Have

a Trinitarian

Doctrine

of

the

Holy

Spirit?

Not until the fourth

century

was

the

status and role of the

Spirit

raised in

any significant

way.

Though

the

battle over the

divinity

of the

Spirit

was limited to a

period

of

about

thirtyyears

(late

50's to

'81)

of

the fourth

century,

theologians

in

the East were

making

decisions which

would de

termine

the

broad lines of

pneumatology,

among

them

Origen

(cl85-c254).

Fierce battles were

fought

after

Origen's

death

concerning

this

exegete, theologian, apologist, mystic, spiritual

master,

church

man,

schoolman,

creative

scholar

of

prodigious

output,

and undoubted

man of

genius.

In

the

fourth

century

the

unbending rigidity

of

Epipha

nius (c315-403) was joined to the irascibility of Jerome (c342-420) to

defame

the man

whom

Harnack calls "the

only

true

scholar

which

the

early

church

possessed"1.

More

than

any

scholar before Jerome he re

spected

the

Hebrew text of the Old

Testament,

and maintained

high

standards

for textual criticism2.

Origen

is a

towering figure

in

whose

shadow

the whole of the

pre-Nicean

church stood for

good

or ili.

The

post-Nicean

era,

on both

sides

of

the

ledger,

was

paying

its debts to

him;

and

stili

today

we

pay

our dues.

Purporting

to

be

citing

the western

view,

George

Scholarius,

the

fifteenth

century Byzantine

scholar,

wrote:

"Where

Origen

was

good,

no

one is

better,

where he was

bad,

no

one is worse"3. Scholarius indicated that this ambiguity drew down on

Origen's

head the distinction of

being

called

the Father of

Orthodoxy

and the

Father of Arianism. At least

Jerome,

that sometime

friend,

was

convinced that

Origen

had

spawned

the

heresy

of

Arius4,

a view difficult

to

demonstrate.

1

Adolph

Harnack,

"Origen",

Twentieth-Century

Theology

in the

Making (ed.

Jaros

lav

Pelikan;

New York:

Harper

&

Row,

1969)

3,196.

2

R.P.C.

Hanson,

Origen's

Doctrine

of

Tradition

(London:

SPCK,

1954)

85.

3

Quoted

in Henry

Chadwick,

Early

Christian

Thought

and the Classical

Tradition

(New York: Oxford University, 1966) 95.

4

Letter

84,

To

Pachomius and Oceanus

4;

CSEL 55:

125,

126.


2/31

6

KILIAN

McDONNELL,

OSB

Origen

is

a

maker

of

decisions.

If one

compares

his

theology

to that

of his

predecessor,

Clement of

Alexandria

(cl50-c215),

one is struck

by

the

gain

in

definiteness5.

Yet it is an

open-ended

determination,

aware

that

the tradition is

undeveloped, questions

are unsettled. If his deci

sions are

bold,

they

are also

exploratory,

tentative. The subordination

ism evident in his trinitarian

teaching

is

part

of his

groping

for answers

not

yet

available. Here he cannot be faulted.

Until

355

everyone,

with

the

exception

of

Athanasius,

is a subordinationist6. The tradition is un

ashamedly

monarchian. Given

Origen's

readiness to take

positions

together with the knowledge that much was free speculation, one is

astonished

at how much

of his doctrine of the

Spirit anticipated

Nicea

by

a hundred

years.

Judged by

the

Cappadocian

settlement

Origen's

doc

trine

of the

Spirit,

without benefit

of

the

theological

discussion and de

velopment immediately

before and after

Nicea,

is

largely

on

target.

An

achievement of

some

magnitude

The

fourth

century

defenders

of the

divinity

the

Holy

Spirit

were ali

indebted

to

him.

Gregory

of Nazianzus

(329-389)

summed it

up

when

he

said that

"Origen

is the stone on

which ali

of us were

sharpened"7.

Basii

(ca. 330-379)

and

Gregory

Nazianzus,

as a mark of their

admiration,

sifted

through

the

writings

of their master to

produce

an

Origen

anthol

ogy,

the

Philocalia,

containing many passages

whose Greek text

would

otherwise have been lost to

posterity.

A dose look at the selections

shows

that discretion was used

in

the

choice,

especially

in

avoiding

tri

nitarian

passages

which

might

be

interpreted

as subordinationist. Basii

and

Gregory

did not

altogether

avoid

On

First

Principles,

where

Origen

placed

his most

pronounced

trinitarian

teaching,

and therefore located

the focus

of the debate.

Perhaps

even more than the other two

Cap

padocians, Gregory

of

Nyssa

remained

under his

influence,

which

"seriously

imperilled

his

reputation

for

orthodoxy"8.

Nonetheless,

he

was not slavish. When Origen's anthropology needed correcting,

Greg

ory

of

Nyssa

did not hesitate to set the

master

right9.

The

Cappadocians,

5

Hanson,

Origen's

Doctrine

of

Tradition,

183.

6

R.P.C.

Hanson,

The Search

for

the

Christian Doctrine

ofGod

(Edinburgh:

T.&T.

Clark,

1988)

xix,

64.

7

Recorded

by Hesychius

and found as an

entry

in

Svidae Lexicon

(ed.

A.

Adler;

Stuttgart:

Teubner,

1933)

3,

619.

W.

Fairweather,

Origen

and Greek Patristic

Theology

(New

York:

Charles Scrib

ner,

1901)

243;

Hans

Urs

von

Balthasar, "Introduction",

Origen: Spirit

and Fire

(ed.

R.J.

Daly;

Washington,

D.C.:

Catholic

University

of

America,

1984)

1.

9

J. Laplace, "Introduction", Gregory of Nyssa's The Creation of Man SC 6:

30-33;

D.L.

Balas,

"Origenes",

TRE 14: 177.


3/31

DOES ORIGEN HAVE A TRINITARIAN

DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT?

7

together

with

Athanasius

(c296-373),

defended

Origen,

even

when

they

took different

positions,

and

admitted that

he

was not without error.

Some authors of the

pre-Nicene

church

presuppose

the

divinity

of

the

Spirit10,

some,

for

instance,

going

to

great lengths

to

avoid

explicitly

stating

it,

even

when

there is no doubt

as to

substance.

However,

there

were also

problems,

wihch counseled caution11. Neither Athanasius nor

Basii

apply

"God"

to

the

Spirit,

even

though writing

respectively

from

138-148

and 152-162

years

later,

after considerable

theological

develop

ment,

writing

with the set

purpose

of

establishing

the

Spirit's

divinity.

Indeed, Basii uses "tortuous circumlocutions" to avoid

saying

the

Spirit

is God12. If it is

trae,

as G.L.

Prestige

declares,

that

no

Greek

in

explicit

terms said "the

Spirit

is God" before

Epiphanius,

this would in broad

terms mean until the

beginning

of the fifth

century13. Already

at the

beginning

of the third

century,

two hundred

years

earlier,

Origen,

though

not

applying

"God" to the

Spirit, complains

of those

who

"have

low views

of

the

divinity

of the

Spirit"14.

In

a

context

where

he is

writing

of

the three

persons, Origen

says,

"the

relations between

(them) belong

to the

nature of

the

deity"15.

10

.

Crouzel,

Origen (San

Francisco:

Harper

&

Row,

1989)

198,

199,

"... it

was

commonly

assumed

and taken for

granted

..."

G.L.

Presttce,

God

in

Patristic

Thought

(London:

SPCK,

1952)

xxii;

"It

was

everywhere

acknowledged

that God is

Spirit,

and

taken for

granted

that the

Spirit

of God is God". T.F.

Torrance,

Theology

in Reconstruc

tion

(Grand

Rapids:

Eerdmans,

1965)

209.

The

early

evidence

must,

however,

be read with

care;

recognition

of the

divinity

of the

Spirit may

be an

expression

of the identification

of

the

Holy Spirit

with the

pre-existent

Christ,

or the

Logos.

H.A.

Wolfson,

The

Philosophy

of

the Church

Fathers

(Cambridge:

Harvard

University, 1964)

183-256.

11

"It

may

seem obvious

for the

contemporary

theologian

to

acknowledge

the

divinity

of

the

Holy Spirit

and his

personal

distinction

within

the

Trinity,

but we have

only

to read

the Fathers

of the fourth

century

to realize

afresh how

tremendously

difficult it was

for

Orthodox

pneumtalogy

to shake itself free not

only

from subordinationism, but also from a

certain confusion between the

Spirit,

on the one

hand,

and his

gifts,

or

the

divine

nature,

or

the incarnate

Logos,

or the risen

Christ,

on

the

other,

a confusion

encouraged by

the

imprecisions

of

Scripture".

Andr

de

Halleux,

"Towards

an Ecumenical

Agreement

on

the Procession

of the

Holy Spirit

and the

Addition of

the

Filioque

to the

Creed",

Spirit of

God:

Spirit of

Christ: Ecumenical

Reflections

on the

Filioque

Controversy

(ed.

L.

Vischer;

London:

SPCK,

1981)

75.

12

M.

Anastas,

"Basil's

Rata Eunomiou:

A Criticai

Analysis",

Basii

Of

Caesarea:

Christian, Humanist,

Ascetic

(2

vols.;

ed.

P.J.

Fedwick;

Toronto:

Pontificai Institute

of

Mediaeval

Studies,

1981)

1,131.

13

God

in

Patristic

Thought,

92. The reference

is to the Ancoratus

or The

Firmly

Anchored

Man, 9;

PG 43:

32,

33.

14

On

First

Principles

2,7,3:

SC 252: 332.

Hereafter cited as OFP.

See also Commen

tary on Matthew 15: 30; PG 13: 1242, 1343.15

OFP

1,1, 8;

SC 252: 108.


4/31

8

KILIAN

McDONNELL,

OSB

In

the whole

of

the

Basilian

corpus

there is

only

one

explicit

refer

ence to

Origen by

name,

and this has to do with the

divinity

of

the

Holy

Spirit16.

First Basii remarks

that

Origen's

ideas on the

Holy Spirit

"are

not

always

absolutely

sound"17. Then

he

contends

that in

"many places,

moved

by

the force of

custom,

he

(Origen) speaks

in an orthodox

way

of

the

Holy Spirit"18.

Basii then

quotes Origen's

Commentary

on John:

"the water bath

symbolizes

the

purification

of the

soul,

washed

of

every

stain of

evil;

it

(baptismal

rite of the water

bath)

contains the

principle

and source of the

charisms,

through

the

power

of the

epiclesis,

for

the

one who gives oneself to the deity (theotes) of the adorable Trinity"19.

Operative

here is what

Athanasius,

and

Gregory

Nazianzus,

cali Basil's

"economy",

that

is,

the firmness of his conviction that the

Spirit

is to

receive the same honor as the Father and the Son

(homotimos),

and

is,

indeed,

of one substance

with

the Father and Son

(homoousios),

cou

pled

with

his reluctance

to

use homoousios

explicitly

of the

Spirit

out

of

pastoral

concern for the volatile situation of

orthodoxy

in Asia Minor20.

Not

wanting

to

say nakedly

"The

Spirit

is

God",

Basii

slyly

uses

Origen,

a believer in the

divinity

of the

Spirit

before it became a battle

field,

to

proclaim

that the

trinity

s the

deity

(theotes),

whose

power

is

operative

in baptism21. Surrender the trinityor acknowledge the divinity of the

Spirit

So

Basii reads

Origen.

Scholarship

Divided: Prodded

by

Basil's

remarks,

I looked at

Origen

research

and found two

sets

of

positions,

the first

regarding

the

level of

Origen's

interest in the

Holy Spirit.

A. Harnack

perceives

Origen

as

having

"no

specific theological

interest" in

the

Holy Spirit22.

The Russian thinker P. A.

Florensky

thinks that

Origen's pneumatology

is a "false

window",

inserted "for the

sake of

symmetry

of the

structure,

16

J.

Gribomont,

"L'Orignisme

de Saint

Basile",

L'Homme devant Dieu:

Mlanges

offerteau Pre Henri de Lubac (Paris: Aubier, 1963) 1, 290; On the Holy Spirit 29: 73, SC

17bis: 506.

17

Ibid.

18

Ibid.

19

Ibid.\

Commentary

on John

6, 33, 166;

SC 157: 254.

20

Gregory

Nazianzus

gently upbraided

Basii for his

hesitancy.

Letter

58;

PG

37:

118.

Athanasius calls Basii

"the

glory

of

the

church",

and defends his

prudence, asking

others

"to look

at the

scope

of

truth,

at the

economy (i.e.

special

purpose)"

of Basil's

position.

Letter to

Palladius;

PG 26:

1,

68. In a letter written

to

three

brother

bishops

in

372,

two

years

before

he

wrote On the

Holy

Spirit,

Basii exhorts them to

recognize

that "the

Son

is

consubstantial with the

Father,

and ...

the

Spirit enjoys

the same

honor,

and is counted and

adored with

them". Letter 90:

2;

Saint Basile:

Lettres

(ed.

Y.

Courtonne;

3

vols.;

Paris:

Socit d'Edition "Les Belles

Lettres",

1957)

1,

196.

21

On the Holy Spirit 29: 73; 17bis: 506.22

History of Dogma (7

vols.;

New York:

Dove,

1961)

4,

110.


5/31

DOES ORIGEN HA VE A TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT?

y

and

nothing

more"23. H.

Koch,

C.R.B.

Shapland,

and F.D. Hauschild

ali assert

that

Origen

has

no

real

place

for the

Spirit,

Hauschild

adding

that his

pneumatology

is

"immature",

that "he could have

presented

the

work of

sanctification

equally

well without

any

mention of the

Spirit"24.

A

variation

on

this disinterest

in the

Spirit

is

Origen's

habit of

thinking

in

binarian

(Father

and

Son),

rather

than

trinitarian terms25.

The

second set of

positions

calls

into doubt the

importance Origen

attaches to trinitarian

theology,

which conditions

his

pneumatology.

Harnack contends that

Origen

included the

Spirit

within the

trinity

be

cause it was found in the rule of faith, "and for no other reason";

Origen's

speculative system

has

"no need for a

Spirit alongside

of the

Logos..

."26 E. J. Fortman holds

that

"Origen

tried to build a harmonious

synthesis

of strici monotheism

and a

Platonic

hierarchical order in the

Trinity

and failed"27. J.W.

Trigg,

C.

Schiitz,

and

F. Courth ali think

that

Origen

was not

really

interested

in the

trinity28.

n the other

hand,

J.N.D.

Kelly

writes of his

"brilliant" trinitarian

formulation,29

and

H.U.

von

Balthasar

of his

"magnificent

salvation

history

trinitarianism"30.

Finally,

C.

Kannengiesser

sees

the

trinity

as

Origen's "originai

motiva

tion" in the

composition

of On First

Principles,

with

Father, Son,

and

Spirit constituting three firstprinciples in one Godhead31. In choosing to

23

"On the

Holy

Spirit",

Ultimate

Questions

(ed.

A.

Schmemann;

New York:

Holt,

Reinahrt,

and

Winston,

1965)

143.

24

Koch,

Pronoia und Paideusis

(Berlin:

de

Gruyter, 1932)

18,

footnote

1; Shapland,

The

Letters

of

Saint Athanasius

Concerning

the

Holy Spirit (New

York:

Philosophical

Lib

rary,

1951,)

20,

footnote

11; Hauschild,

Gottes

Geist und der Mensch: Studien

zurfriichrist

lichen

Pneumatologie (Munich:

Kaiser,

1972)

136, 141,

149.

25

Hauschild thinks that the

beginnings

of his

theology

is

binitarian,

his

system

and

piety

also,

though

he is

theologically

trinitarian. Ibid.

140,138;

B.

Studer,

Gottund

unsere

Erlsung

im Glauben der Alte Kirche

(Dusseldorf:

Patmos,

1985)

109. Studer thinks his

binitarian stance should not be

interpreted

as

simply

a

Logos theology.

26

Lehrbuch der

Dogmengeschichte

(Darmstadt:

Wissenschaftliche

Buchgesellschaft,

1980)

1,

674.

The

Triune God:

A Historical

Study of

the Doctrine

of

the

Trinity (Grand Rapids:

Baker

Holse,

1972)

57.

28

Trigg,

Origen (Atlanta:

John

Knox,

1983)

103; Schutz,

Einfiihrung

in die Pneuma

tologie (Darmstadt:

Wissenschaftliche

Buchgesellschaft, 1985)

38;

Courth,

Trinitt in der

Schrift

und Patristik

(Handbuch

der

Dogmengeschichte

2/la)

(Freiburg:

Herder,

1988)

104,

105.

29

Early

Christian Doctrines

(rev.

ed.;

San Francisco:

Harper

&

Row,

1978)

128.

Catherine

Lacugna thinks

that

Kelly

"overstates the

degree

to which the doctrine

of

the

Trinity

is

present,

albeit

incipiently,

in

pre-trinitarian

texts

(biblical

and

non-biblical)".

Letter to

myself

5

January

1992.1

thank Dr.

Lacugna

for her

helpful suggestions.

30

"Introduction",

Origen: Spirit

and Fire: A Thematic

Anthology of

His

Writings

(Washington,

D.C.: Catholic

University, 1984)

14.

31

"Divine Trinity and the Structure of Peri Archon", Origen of Alexandria: His World

and His

Legacy

(eds.

C.

Kannengieser

and

W.L.

Petersen;

South

Bend:

University

of


6/31

10

KILIAN

McDONNELL,

OSB

integrate

the middle-Platonic

principles

into his

conception

of the

god

head,

he was

taking

"an

epoch-making"

initiative32.

Origen might

have

more

properly

entitled the treatise "On the

Trinity"33.

The

response

to

these

positions obviously

inhere in one

another.

Though

the

question

of

Origen's subordinating

language

is

not

my

main

concern

here,

one cannot treat either his

doctrine of the

trinity

or

of the

Spirit

without

repeatedly confronting

it. Is it

ontological,

or is it

an

expression

either

of

a relation of

origin,

or of an

economie function

(as

one

who is

sent)?

Though many

scholars declare

Origen

free

of

sub

ordinating

in an

ontological

mode,

G.L.

Prestige,

J.

Danilou,

and E.J.

Fortman do not

entirely

absolve him34. How

subordination is under

stood

in this article is

judged by

the

context.

Uncertain

Texts:

Origen's pneumatological

and trinitarian

texts are

principally

in On First

Principles (written

in

229-230)

and his Commen

tary

on John

(written

in

231

and

234),

both written

when

he

was stili

a

young

man35. On First

Principles

was

composed

for

informed Christ

iane,

such as his

patron,

Ambrose,

who

already

had

some

philosophic

awareness,

and were

eager

to

deepen

their

knowledge

of

the

scriptures.

Origen's

purpose

is to

oppose

the

propaganda

made

by

the

seets,

such

as the

Valentinians,

using philosophical

tools. The

operative

word is

"research",

the

pursuit

of truth

including

some areas left

open by

scrip

ture and

undetermined

by

the tradition. On

John, likewise,

has

a

pole

mical

intent,

namely,

to refute an

allegorizing commentary

on the

Fourth

Gospel by

the Valentinian

Heracleon

(fi.

c.

145-180).

Besides

providing

a

commentary

rooted in the

centrai

tradition

which would

lessen

the

gnostic temptations, Origen

wants to

open

up

the ascent to

the

highest contemplation.

The

exact nature of

Origen's

doctrine in

pneumatology

and trinita

rian

doctrine is

somewhat

disputed,

as the

surviving

text of

On

First

Principles

is

mostly

in the Latin translation of Rufinus

(c.345-410),

the

friend-adversary

of Jerome.

Though

the older

scholarship questioned

Rufinus'

reliability

as a

translator,

some

agreement

exists

today

that

he

Notre

Dame,

1988)

245,

246.

. Crouzel

and .

Simonetti

identify

three

groups

of first

principles:

the three

persons,

rational

creatures,

and the world.

SC

269:

235.

3

Ibid.,

237

33

Ibid.,

247.

34

Prestige,

God in

Patristic

Thought (London:

SPCK,

1952)

134; Danielou,

Origen

(New

York: Sheer and

Ward,

1955)

255;

Fortman,

The

Triune

God,

56. An

ontological

subordination of the Son to the

Father,

radically

changes

the relation

of the

Spirit

to the

Son and Father.

35

.

,

Origne:

Sa

vie et son

Oeuvre

(Paris:

Beauchesne,

1977)

408,

411.


7/31


8/31

12 KILIAN

McDONNELL,

OSB

(distinct)

subsistent

(hypostaseis)

realities,

Father,

Son

and

Holy

Spirit"41.

This

is the

first time that

hypostasis

is

used to

designate

three

distinct

persons,

not

yet,

however,

in

the more

precise

sense

developed

later42.

In

the

pre-Nicene age

it had the

meaning

of a distinct existence

or an individuai

reality43. Origen

here is

speaking

of three

subsisting

realities

existing

from

ali

eternity;

the

Spirit

and

the

Son

are more than

ways

of the

high

Father

dealing

with

time. The

creative mind

of

Origen,

realizing

the

Logos

is

being eternaily generated,

not

generated

once as a

completed

act,

prompts

this

conclusion,

a

major

contribution

to trinita

rian thought44.While the Spirit, like the Son, is a mediator between the

transcendent,

inaccessible God

and created

reality,45

neither are

simply

instruments of

mediation,

a

way

of

God

entering history. They pre-exist

history.

The

Spirit

is

ranged equally

with the Father

and

Son,

having

no

proper

existence

(ousia

for

Origen)

distinct from the Father

and

the

Son46. The

Spirit

needs the Son

radically,

that

is,

as

intermediary

"in

order

to

subsist

individually"47.

Not even that is

enough:

the

Spirit

needs

the

Son "in order

to

be

wise,

intelligent,

just...

since

(the Spirit)

participates

in the

attributes

of

Christ"48.

This

strong christological

affirmation is

not

an

expression

of the

Spirit's ontological

subordination

to the Son.

At

this

early stage

of

theological

development,

before conciliar de

cisions had

given

firmer

shape

to trinitarian

doctrine,

Origen

could,

on

theorizing

about the relation

of the Son to the

Father,

write

that it

might

be

possible

"to

speak

in one sense of two

Gods,

in another sense

of

one

God".49 This

should

not be

interpreted

as a heretical

pluralism

in

God,

even

though

at a later

stage

of

development

this

would

be

considered,

at

best,

loose talk and

perilous.

On the

contrary,

the

unity

of God is

given

special prominence.50 Origen

writes of

God as

being "Unity (monas)

...

Oneness

(henas) throughout".51

God is

presented

as the creator from ali

eternity. Origen

distin

41

2, 10, 75;

SC 120: 254.

42

Prestigi;,

God in Patristic

Thought,

94.

Origen

uses

hyposlasis

of the

Father and

Son

again

in

Against

Celsus

8:12;

150: 200.

4SC 120:

400,

note 401.

44

Kelly,

Early

Christian

Doctrines,

129.

45

Hauschild,

Gottes Geist und der

Mensch,

147.

46

On

John, 2, 10, 74;

SC 120: 255.

47

Ibid., 2,

10, 76;

SC 120: 256.

48

Ibid.

49

Disputation

with Heraclides 2: SC

67:

56.

50

OFP 1, 1, 6; SC 252: 100. See also CSJ 2, 199; SC 120: 344.51

OFP

1,1, 6;

SC 252: 100.


9/31

DOES ORIGEN

HA VE A TRINITARI

DOCTRINE OF THE

HOLY SPIRIT? 13

guishes

between "the

God",

who

is

the

Father,

and

"God",

who

is

the

Son,

with

the definite article

distinguishing

the source.52 The

Son

is

eter

nally

begotten

by

the

Father. The

procession

of

the Son from the Father

takes

place

not in

virtue

of a division or

separation,

but

in

the

way

the

will

proceeds

from

reason,

that is within the

unity:

"As

an act of

the will

proceeds

from the

understanding,

and neither

cuts

off

any part

nor is

separated

or divided

from

it,

so

after

some such

fashion

is

the Father to

be

supposed

as

having begotten

the

Son,

his own

image".53

Here

again,

the theme of

unity

within a monarchian framework. Three times in his

writings he repeats the famous dictum, "Never was there a time when

the

Son was

not",

which Athanasius

will

quote against

the Arians.54 He

further

specifies

that the

Logos

is "the

Uncreated

One"55.

There are

two

ways

in which

Origen

approaches

the doctrine

of

the

Son. One

places

the Son closer

to

the

Father56,

and the other

places

the

Son

closer

to

creatures57. This raises

questions

of subordinationism. The

most offensive

passage

declares

that

the Father

"is

superior

to

every

being

that exists ... the Son

being

less than the

Father,

is

superior

to

rational

creatures alone

(for

he

is

second to

the

Father);

the

Holy

Spirit

is

stili

less,

and dwells with the saints alone

...

the

power

of the Father is

greater than that of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and that of the Son is

more than that of the

Holy Spirit,

and in turn the

power

of the

Holy

Spirit

exceeds that of

every

other

holy being"58.

The

inequality

here

is

not

ontological,

rather it is rooted in what the

person

does.

In

other

contexts

Origen

twice

contends,

using

different

formulations,

that

"there is

nothing greater

or lesser in the

trinity"59.

Athanasius,

the

fier

cest foe of

ontological

subordinationism,

who

probably

had this text of

On First

Principles

1,3,7

in front of

him,

does

not find it

offensive;

rather he

praises Origen

as

"very

learned and industrious"60.

52

CSJ

2, 12-18;

SC 120:

214-219.

53

OFP1,2,6;

SC 252:122. The

psychological

analysis

of the

trinity begun

here will be

further

explored by Gregory

of

Nyssa

and

Augustine.

54

OFP

1,2,9; 4,4,1;

SC

252:130;

SC

268:

400;

Commentary

on Romans

1:5;

PG

14:

848;

H.

Crouzel,

Origen (San

Francisco:

Harper

&

Row,

1989)

187.

55

Against

Celsus 6:

17;

SC

147: 222.

56

Commentary

on Matthew 15:

10;

PG 13:

1280,

1281.

57

CSJ

13:151;

SC

222:112,114.

For a

study

of this twofold

aspect

of

Origen

see J.A.

Lyons,

The Cosmic Christ in

Origen

and Teilhard de Chardin

(Oxford: University

Press,

103-117.

OFP

1, 3, 5;

SC 252:

152,

154.

59

Ibid., 1, 3, 7;

SC 252:

160;

CSJ

2, 10, 77;

SC 120: 256.

60

Letters to Serapion 4: 9,10; SC 15: 187-189. See SC 253: 64-70. Athanasius cites the

Greek of OFP

4,

4,

1,

a decisive text

which

demonstrates

that

Origen

did not subordinate

1982L


10/31

14 KILIAN

McDONNELL,

OSB

In a

passage

found not

in Rufinus' Latin

translation,

but in the

Greek

text,

Origen

calls

the

Son

and the

Spirit

creatures

(ktisma)61.

Both

the

authenticity

and the

interpretation

of

this word

have been

questioned62. Very likely

Origen

understands ktisma as

"taking

one's

origin

from"63. In this view later

history

did not understand ktisma as

Origen

had,

but used it as it was understood at

Nicaea,

namely,

as "a

finite creature". Confusion

reigned

because readers

thought Origen

was

teaching

the

Son

and the

Spirit

are creatures in the usuai sense. The

false

impression

was reinforced

because

Origen

quotes

Proverbs

8:22:

"The Lord created me in the beginning of his work", a text which he, as

many

others,

applied

to the Son64. Also a favorite text is Colossians

1:15: "He is the

image

of the invisible

God,

the first-born of ali

creation"65. When

Origen

is

speaking

about the

Son

(and

the

Spirit)

as a

creature he should be understood

in the

framework of these

two

scriptur

al

passages.

The Son is the

intermediary,

the one who stands between

the uncreated nature

(agennetos)

and the created nature

(genetos)66.

The

Son, himself,

is both

uncreated,

because he was never absent

from

the

Godhead,

and

created,

because he derives from the

source,

the

Father67. In

Origen's

context uncreated and created are not in

contradiction68.

Origen

views the Son

(and

the

Spirit)

within an

expanded

view of

the undivided

godhead

rather than a division from it. The hierarchical

order or

graded

structure

of

Platonism

within which he works does not

necessarily

violate a

rigorous

monotheism,

or

the monarchian

perspec

the Son

ontoiogically

to the Father.

Further,

if,

as seems

likely,

Athanasius had the

originai

Greek in front of him of OFP

1,3,7,

this

gives

the assurance that

Rufinus

has not

improved

the text.

AtHANAStus,

On the

Decrees

of

the

Synod ofNicaea;

PG 25:

465,

61

Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova

et

Amplissima

Collectio

(53

vols.;

ed. J.

Mansi;

Paris:

Flubert

Welter,

1902)

9, 524,

525. Hereafter rited as Mansi.

62

C.W.

Lowry,

"Did

Origen Style

the Son a

kitisma",

JTS 39

(1938)

39-42.

63

Crouzel and

Simonetti, "Introduction",

SC252:

42,43,

and SC 253:11

note

5,

and

the

notes

in

SC 269: 242-246.

Prestige,

God in Patristic

Thought,

133-138 is not

willing

to

entirely

repudiate

the

reading

of ktisma

as creature

in its

usuai sense.

64

See Daniel

Huet,

Origeniana

21-29;

PG

17: 768-790.

65

In

Against

Celsus he

quoted

this

verse,

directly

or

indirectly,

fourteen

times,

more

than

any

other biblical text.

66

Against

Celsus

3: 34: SC 136: 80.

67

Ibid.,

6:

17;

SC 147: 222. See reflections of C. Blanc SC 120:

180,

footnote 3.

68

Prestige,

God in Patristic

Thought,

138.

Origen's vocabulary

does not have the

specificity

it was later to

attain. For

him,

as for most authors before the Arian

struggle,

theologians

used

genetos

and

gennetos

interchangeably,

as also

agenetos

and

agennetos.

Crouzel, Origen, 174,175. For the later period see C.M. Lacugna, God for Us: The Trinity

in Christian

Life

(Harper:

San

Francisco,

1991)

32,

33.


11/31

DOES

ORIGEN

HA VE

A TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT? 15

tive.

Scholars do not

agree

on what

meaning Origen

attaches

to the

"consubstantiality"

(homoousios)

of the Son with the Father69. In

any

case,

the

Son's

existence

has

its

beginnings

not

in

time but

in

the

timelessness of God70. Within this

enlarged perspective

on

the

divine

nature

Origen

stresses

hierarchy

and

order. Because Jesus

speaks

of the

Father

as

"the

only

true God"

(John 17:3)71, Origen

calls

the Father

"Godself

'

(autotheos)

and

places

the Son in a

position

under

the Father.

The

Son is "inferior" to the Father because the latter

sends

the former72.

The

Son

is

a

"secondary

God"

(deuteros

theos),

God

by participation,

but nonetheless "God",

eternally

and

everlastingly

begotten by

the

Father73.

By expressing plurality

within monarchian

unity Origen

safe

guards

monotheism.

The

Force

of Logos Logic:

Origen

developed

his doctrine of the

Holy Spirit

using

a

Logos logie,

so that the

theology

of the Son becomes

normative for that of the

Spirit.

The

Logos logie

seems to be a foresha

dowing

of the

fourth-century

"correlative

principle", namely,

that the

Spirit

is to the Son

as the Son is to

the Father74.

If

the Son

is out

of the

substance of the

Father,

then the

Spirit

must be

out

of the substance of

the Son.

In On First

Principles

Origen

identifies the

apostolic teaching

that

the

Holy

Spirit

is "united in honor and

dignity

with Father and Son"75.

69

At issue is a

fragment

of

Origen's

Commentary

on Hebrews

where,

after

concluding

from Wisdom 7: 25

that the Son

is "a breath of the

power

of

God,

a

pure

effluence of the

glory

of the

almighty", Origen

then deduces "a

community

of substance between the

Father and the

Son.

For

an effluence would

appear

to be

homoousios,

or of one

subst

ance". PG 14: 1308. See also note SC 253:

40,

41.

Kelly,

Early

Christian

Doctrines

130,

without

disputing

the

authenticity

of the

text,

points

out that the homoousios

is

from Rufi

nus' Latin

traslation,

while ali extant Greek

texts

represent

the communion of Father and

Son as one

of

love,

will and action.

Fortman,

The

Triune

God,

56,

remarks that

homoousios

might

mean "of

generically

the same

substance",

or "of

identically

the same

substance". Fortman concludes: "... in the

light

of

Origen's

subordinationism it would

seem that he understood consubstantial

only

in its

generic

sense,

even

though

his monothe

ism

should

point

toward

identity

of

substance".

H.

Crouzel,

Thologie

de

l'image

de Dieu

chez

Origine (Paris:

Aubier,

1956)

98-110,

maintains that

Origen

teaches a certain

consub

stantiality

of

the Son with the Father.

70

OFP

1, 2, 11;

SC:

252: 138.

71

CSJ

2, 2, 16;

2,10,

75;

SC

120:

126,

254,

256.

72

Against

Celsus

8:

15;

SC

150: 206.

73

Ibid.,

5:

39;

SC 147:

118; CSJ6,

39,202:

SC

157:

280;

OFP

1,2, 4;

SC 252:118.

J.

Danielou,

Gospel Message

and Hellenistic Culture

(Philadelphia:

Westminster,

1973)

378.

74

John

McIntyre,

"The

Holy Spirit

in Greek Patristic

Thought",

Scottish Journal

of

Theology

1

(1954)

366.

McIntyre applies

this to the

fourth-century

Greek

theologians,

but

it seems operative in some manner also in Origen.75

1, Preface, 4;

SC 252: 82.


12/31

16

KILIAN

McDONNELL,

OSB

Reflecting

on the

apostolic

rule of

faith,

he declares

that the inherited

canon of belief did not determine whether the

Spirit

"is born or not

bora,

whether to consider him a Son of God or not"76.

Both the Son and

Holy Spirit

have their source

in

the Father: "the

one is born and the other

proceeds"77.

Borrowed from John

15:26,

"pro

ceeds" in

this context does not have the technical content

it will have

later.

Though

the

Spirit proceeds

from

the

Father78,

it

is not in

the

later

sense of "from the Father alone". The rule of faith which

Origen

in

herits

not a fixed or written

norm,

but an orai tradition79

does not

determine the origins of the Spirit.

No

surprise,

then,

that

Origen

earlier

struggles

with

the

question.

Because the

Spirit

is neither without

origin (ungenerated),

nor

gener

ated,

Origen

can

only

place

the

Spirit

within the

totality

of what the

Logos

makes,

produces,

or causes to come into

being. Again

he takes

John

1:3 as his

guide:

"Ali

things

carne into

being through

him"80.

Though

crude,

the intent is clear and

acceptable.

In other contexts he

gives greater precision: "Everything

was made

except

the nature

of

the

Father,

the

Son,

and the

Holy

Spirit"81. Beyond

that he

says

that ulti

mately

the

Spirit

comes

from the Father mediated

by

the Son82.

What

Origen

has in common with the

Cappadocians

is his

respect

for the

majestic

mystery

hidden in God

"transcending

ali

time,

and ali

ages,

and ali

eternity"83. Origen

hints at that

unspeakable

secret now

spoken by differentiating

between the Father

and Son

on

the one

hand,

and the

Spirit,

on the

other.

Pagan

philosophers

can know God as

Father,

and even the

Logos,

who created ali

things84.

No

pagan

even

suspected

that

the

Spirit

exists;

nor

could

they,

because

they

are

ignor

ant of

the

scriptures

and of Christ85. The

rooting

of the

Spirit

in the

mystery

of

the

Logos

will

appear again

in its most

pronounced

form in

Athanasius,

with

problems

of

giving

the same

"autonomy"

to

Spirit

as

he accords to the

Logos.

76

Ibid.

77

Ibid.,

1, 2,

13:

SC

252: 142.

78

Ibid. For the

textual

problems

see SC 253:

55,

56.

75

G.

Kretschmar,

Studien zur

friihchristlichen Trinittstheologie

(Tiibingen:

Mohr,

Siebeck,

1956)

127-128.

80

CSJ

2, 10,

73:

CS 120: 252.

81

OFP

4, 4,

8;

SC 268: 420.

82

SCJ

2,10,76;

SC

120:

256.

With

some

justifiction

Prfstige notes the doubl

proces

sion

of

the

Spirit

from

the Father

and

the Son. God in Patristic

Thought,

249-251.

83

OFP

4, 4, 1;

SC

268:

402.

84

Ibid., 1, 3, 1; SC 252: 142, 144; Against Celsus 3: 47; SC 136: 112, 114.85

OFP

1,

3,

1;

SC252:

142,

144.


13/31

DOES ORIGEN

HA VE A TRINITARIAN

DOCTRINE

OF THE HOLY SPIRIT?

17

The affirmation

that there are three

subsisting hypostases, already

mentioned,

appears

in a section devoted to the

Spirit86.

When

Origen

wants to

clarify

the

identity

of

the

Spirit,

he does so in

strong,

trinitarian

terms,

in a formulation which

emphasizes equality.

In the same context

he further

specifies

that

of

ali that comes

through

the Word the

Holy

Spirit

"has more

dignity

than

ali

the rest"87. The

emphasis

is not

on

the

Spirit belonging

to

the same

category

"creatures",

but on the sameness

of

the source: ali creatures and ali

ages

come

through

the

Word,

who

precedes (presbuteros)

the

Spirit

in a

non-temporal

sequence88.

The Elder

Logos:

The

Logos

is "older" than the

Spirit

because the

Spirit

comes from the

Logos89. Origen

is

fully

aware he uses a rhetoric

of

temporal

succession;

he

immediately apologizes

for the

poverty

of

analogical language90.

At no time is the

Spirit

absent from the

trinity91.

As the Son is the

"creature"

of the

Father,

that

is,

one whose

origin

is

from the

Father,

so the

Spirit

is the "creature"

of

the

Son,

for

through

the

Logos

"ali

things

became"

(egeneto

John

L3)92.

"Creature" should

be

taken in the sense of

"taking

one's

origin

from",

not in the

sense

of

being

made93.

Origen

can

say

that the

Spirit

is "created"

by

the

Son,

or

"becomes"

through

the

Son,

meaning

the

Spirit originates

in

the

Son94.

He means the

Spirit

never

is,

or

was,

absent from the

trinity,

from that

expanded

eternai oneness.

Though

confusion

has

reigned

regarding

Origen's

teaching

in this

matter,

he wrote that

"up

to

the

present

we

have been able to find no

passage

in

the

holy scriptures

which would

warrant us in

saying

that the

Holy Spirit

was a

being

made or

created"95.

86

CSJ

2, 10, 75;

SC 120: 254.

87

Ibid.,

2,

10, 76;

SC 120: 256.

88

Ibid.,

2, 10, 72;

SC

120: 252.

89

Ibid.

90

OFP

1, 3, 4;

SC 252: 152.

91

Ibid.

92

CSJ2,10,73;

SC120: 253. Rufinus' translation

has

Origen maintaining

in OFP that

there is no warrant for

saying

that

the

Holy Spirit

is created in

1, 3, 3,

but

the

Greek text

says

that

"everything

whatsoever

except

the Father

and

God

of the universe is created".

See SC

253:

60,

61.

93

Jerome

translated a

passage

of OFP

1,

Preface,

4,

which reads "it is not

yet

clearly

known whether he

is

to be

thought

of as

begotten

or

unbegotten"

as "it is not

yet clearly

known whether he is to be

thought

of as made or not made". SC 253:

14,

note 21.

94

CSJ

2, 10,

73: SC 120: 252.

95

OFP

1, 3,

3;

SC 252: 18. A Greek

fragment

which reads: "...

everything

whatever

except

the Father and God of the universe is created"

preserved

by

Justinian

(Mansi 9:528)

is

discussed

in

SC 253:

60,

61

by

Crouzel and Simonetti.

Reference should be made to

Origen's use of ktisma and genetoslgennetos. SC 253: 14-16. On the precision of Rufinus'

translation see SC 253:

60,

note

19.


14/31

18 KILIAN

McDONNELL,

OSB

The

Spirit

is

not, therefore,

one

among

a number of

equals

in the

cre

ateci order.

The

expression

the "older"

Logos

is

very likely

influenced

by

the

Platonic

hierarchy

of

being,

though

it is

also

prompted

by

the evidence

of

scripture96. Using Logos logie, Origen

can conclude the Son

must

be

greater

than

the

Spirit

because the Father

is

greater

than

the

Logos.

The

Savior

calls the Father

"good",

and this in "a

proper,

true,

and

full

sense",

and he is

properly

"the God". The Son is

"good"

in a derivative

sense,

that

is,

by participation,

and he is "God"97. Like

his

contempor

aries

Origen

never

explicitly says

"the

Spirit

is God".

Using

Logos logie,

we surmise that the

Spirit participates

in

the

deity

which the

Son re

ceives from the

Father,

and is

also

"God". Both the Son

and the

Spirit

transcend ali

creatures,

not

by

comparison,

but

by

"an absolute trans

cendence";

the Father transcends the Son and

Spirit

also

by

a

greater

"distance" than

they

transcend ali other

beings98.

Here

Origen

is

reacting against

those who

exaggerate

the role of

the

Son,

setting

aside

the Savior's dictum

"The Father is

greater

than

I"

(John 14:38)". Origen

reveres the

Spirit

as "the most honorable of ali

beings brought

into

existence,

the

chief

in

rank of ali the

beings origin

ated

by

the Father

through

Christ"100. At bottom the reason for subordi

nating

the

Spirit

to the Son is what later

theologians

will

cali

a

relation

of

origin,

which is what the Alexandrian means when he

says

that

the

Spirit

carne into

being through

the

Son101. The eternai

generation

of the

Son from within the Father

demands,

by

Logos

logie,

the eternai

pro

cession of the

Holy Spirit

from within the

Son

or

the

Godhead.

Very

likely

this means within

the

expanded

oneness of

God.

Origen

contende that those "who

hold low and

unworthy

views" of

the

Spirit's deity

will

also be in error

concerning

the

Spirit's

work or

activity102. truggling

to be

precise

without a

common-developed

termi

nology, Origen

says

that the

Spirit

does not

have an "existence"

(ousia,

but

obviously

not in the

sense used at

Nicaea)

different

from

that of the

Father

and the

Son,

yet

something

distinctive should flow from

"an

in

tellectual

existence,

with a

subsistence

(subsistentia)

and

being

of its

96

Kelly,

Early

Christian

Doctrines,

132.

97

CSJ

2, 2, 12-20;

SC 120:

214-220.

98

CSJ

13:

25,151;

SC 120:

112,

114.

99

Crouzel,

Origen,

203.

100

CS7

2, 10, 75;

SC

120:

254,

256.

101 CSJ 2, 11, 86; SC 120: 262.

102

OFP2, 7, 3;

SC

252: 332.


15/31

DOES ORIGEN

HAVE

A TRINITARIAN

DOCTRINE OF

THE HOLY SPIRIT?

19

own"103.

Again,

subordination

in

Origen

does not rule out

identity

of

nature,

or

equality

in

power,

or

eternity104.

If we read

ontology

into this

triple-graded

Oneness,

we

do an

injus

tice to

Origen,

whose

reflections are also

scriptural,

which even a casual

look at

the

biblical citations

will

verify105.

he Platonic scale

of

being

is

not absolute

master. As was

said,

in

evaluating Origen's

undeniable

subordinating

texts,

one must

keep

them

in

tension

with his bold asser

tion:

"nothing

in the

trinity

can

be called

greater

or lesser"106.

He ex

presses

his

proclivity

for

subordinating

in the

way

he relates

the Son to

the Father.

Predominantly,

he is concerned with the work which the

Father

gave

the

Son to do.

Therefore,

the

subordinating

texts are con

cerned

with the

hierarchy

of

origin,

and are economie rather

than onto

logical,

clear distinctions between

origin

and

economy

not

always

being

made107. One

should, therefore,

balance subordinationist

expressions

in

Origen,

with his statement that

the Father does

not

procreate

the Son

out of

"something

external

to God's own substance"108.

The

Importance

of Being Worthy

One could see

traces of

Origen's

subordinating

vernacular in his doctrine

of sanctification.

Origen's

point

of

departure

is the

unity

of ali divine acts. The

Father,

the

source,

acts

through

the Son and

the

Spirit,

demonstrating

that "there is no

separa

tion in the

Trinity"109.

Notwithstanding

this

bold

affirmation

of the

unity

of triune

action,

he details "the

special activity

of the Father... the

spe

cial

ministry

of the Lord Jesus

Christ,...

the

peculiar

grace

and

work of

the

Holy Spirit"110.

To

guard against

modalism

in his

day,

Origen

de

fines the

proprium,

those distinctive

operations

of each

person111.

K.

Rahner

will

also do

something

similar

in his

day

for the same

reason,

and

for

his

pains

will be accused

of "a subtle

subordinationism"112.

In

Origen,

the

Father and Son act

in

regard

to saints

and

sinners,

rational human

beings

and dumb

animals,

even

lifeless

things,

indeed,

103

OFP

1,

1, 3;

SC 252:

94.

104

Von

Balthasar,

"Introduction",

Origen: Spirit

and

Fire, 6;

Crouzel,

Origen,

188.

105

C.

Bigg,

The Christian

Platonists

(Oxford:

Clarendon,

1886)

181;

Crouzel,

Origen,

171,

172.

106

OFP

1,

3, 7;

SC

252:

160.

107

W.M.

Marcus,

Subordinationismus

(Munich:

Hueber,

1963)

156-163.

108

OFP

3,

4, 1;

SC

268:

400.

109

OFP

1,

3, 7;

SC 252:

160;

Commentary

on

Numbers

12:

1;

SC 29:

237.

110

OFP

1,

3, 7;

SC

252:

160.

111

Courth,

"Trinitatsglaube

und christliche

Gnosis

bei

Origenes",

180.

112

K.

Rahner,

The

Trinity (New

York:

Seabury,

1974)

34-38;

W.J.

Hill,

The Three

Personed God: The Trinity as a Mystery of Salvation (Washington, D.C.: Catholic Uni

versity,

1982)

143,

144.


16/31

20

KILIAN

McDONNELL,

OSB

"absolutely

everything

that exists"113.

Origen

does note the

presence

of

the

Spirit

at

creation,

citing

the text of Genesis 1:2: "The

Spirit

of

God

moved over the waters"114. At

very

least,

this demonstrates that

Origen

believed in the

eternity

of

the

Spirit.

In

spite

of

Origen's

"massive cos

mic consciousness" he never

builds the

Spirit

into the structure of the

inanimate universe115.

Gregory

of

Nyssa,

a fervent

disciple

of

Origen,

heaps

scorn on the exclusion of the

Spirit

from a

significant

role in crea

tion: "If not

present (at

creation),

where was the

Spirit?

... If

present,

why

not active? Because the

Spirit

could not

work,

or would not?"116

Gregory, nonetheless, retains the rhetoric of worthy117.Basii, on the

other

hand,

remains true to

Origen

in On the

Holy

Spirit (374-375)

where the

Spirit

is

given

no role in

creation,

though

in his Homilies on

the

Hexaemeron

(378)

he writes as

though recognizing

an

error,

and he

attempts

to correct

it118.

Origen

believes

"every

rational creature without distinction re

ceives a share in the

Holy Spirit",

a

formulation

which excludes the

whole of non-rational cosmos. This seems in contradiction to his more

usuai restrictive

limiting

"the

special coming

of the

Spirit"

to the

worthy,

the

saints,

"those who are

already

turning

to better

things

and

walking in the ways of Jesus Christ"119. The Spirit has a special rela

tionship

to

baptism,

in

fact,

is

imparted

there.

Nonetheless,

in a

text

whose

authenticity

is

disputed,

but defended

by

H. Crouzel and M.

Simonetti,

he

contends that

"baptism

is not

complete

except

when

per

formed with the

authority

of the most excellent

trinity",

a

point

he

113

OFP1, 3, 5;

SC 252: 154. In this

passage Origen

is

thinking

of

naturai existence of

the

saints,

not

specifically

their

supernatural

quality,

though

he elsewhere

relates

the

Father to the

saints,

beyond

their

naturai existence.

CSJ

2,

13, 96;

SC

120:

268,

270.

Crouzel,

Thologie

de

l'image

de

Dieu chez

Origene,

162.

114 Homilies on Genesis 1:

1;

SC 7: 64.

115

von

Balthasar,

"Introduction",

Origen: Spirit

and

Fire,

13.

116

Against

the

Macedonians

11;

Gregorii

Nysseni Opera (10

vols.;

ed. W.

Jaeger;

Leiden:

Brill,

1959)

3/1, 97,

98. Hereafter

cited as

GNO.

117

Against

the

Macedonians

22;

GNO

3/1,

108.

118

In On the

Holy Spirit

(19:49;

SC 17

bis:

418)

Basii can

speak

of the

Spirit

in relation

to

"creation",

but means

the order of

redemption.

Elsewhere

he

says

no one

can

say

that

"the

Holy Spirit

is alien

to the creative

activity".

Homilies on

the Hexaemeron 2:

6;

SC 26

bis:

169,

170.

119

OFP

2, 7, 2;

SC

252:

328;

See SC

253: 73 note 37. See

OFP

1,

3,

5;

SC

252:

152,

154;

See

SC

253:

188 note 5. In the

context he seems to be

rejecting

the

position

which

restricts

the

Spirit by

nature to the

Valentinian

pneumatics.

On the

contrary,

Origen sug

gests

that the

Spirit

comes

to ali

who,

by

reason of their

conduct,

are

worthy.

Against

Celsus 7: 8; SC 150: 34. Every one receives the vital Spirit (pnoe) of the Genesis 2: 7

account,

by

which

one is

constituted a

human

being.


17/31

DOES ORIGEN HA VE A TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE

OF THE HOLY SPIRIT?

21

underlines

by immediately

twice

naming

Father,

Son,

and

Spirit120.

The

worthy

are not

simply

the

baptized.

On the

supposition

that not ali who

come out of Israel are true

Israelites,

Origen

concludes "not ali those

bathed in

water

are in the

Spirit"121.

Only

the

worthy

are

baptized,

but

not ali the

baptized

remain so122. The

worthy

are

those

retaining

the

inspired discipline

to

transcend

the

world,

impatient

to attain

God

by

running

the

way

of salvation.

The

ascetic

life

begins

in the

primitive

catechumenate;

only

the

worthy

continue

it after

baptism

and these

have the

Spirit.

The

Spirit

departs

from the

unworthy.

Though

he

knows of infant

baptism, Origen

does not consider baptism apart from

moral transformation

through

ascetic

discipline123.

The restriction

to the

baptized

worthy

is a clear

accent,

but one should not

press

it

too

far.

Origen

fine tunes this

position

in a

summary doxology naming

the Son

"who created and restored the

universe",

and

the

Spirit "through

whom

ali

things

are

sanctified",

to the

glory

of the Father124.

No claim is

made that the restriction of the

Spirit

to

the

worthy

is

part

of the

apostolic

faith;

on the

contrary,

when

Origen

lays

out the

apostolic

teaching

he

does not

fence off the

Spirit.

If

Basii Studer

is

correct,

Origen

restricts

the

Spirit

to the

worthy

because he

wants to

leave the Christians

free125,

hat

is,

free to chose the narrow

path

of a

more muscular

Christianity,

the

kind

spiritual guides,

such as

Origen,

are wont to

encourage. Gregory

the

Wonder-Worker

(ca

213-ca

270),

arriving

in Caesarea

just

as

Origen

was

beginning

his

teaching

there,

studied for five

years

under

him,

leaving

an account of how

Origen

also

trained students

in

the

spiritual

life at the catechetical school126 Other

early

Christian

authors,

both

before and after

Origen,

restricted

the

area in

which

the

Spirit

is

active,

"to some who

live

justly"

in Tatian

[ca

160]127,

to the

mystagogue, gnostic, prophet,

and

ecstatic in

Clement

of

120 OFP 1, 3, 2; SC 252: 146.

121

Homilies

on Numbers 3:

1;

SC

29: 90.

Origen

knows that some

of

the catechumens

already

posses

the

Spirit

before sacramentai

baptism.

122

OFP

3, 5,

8;

SC 268: 234.

123

If

you

desire to receive

holy baptism

and obtain the

grace

of the

Spirit,

you

must

first be

purified

by

the

Law". Homilies

on Leviticus 6:

2;

SC 286:

274. K.

Rahner,

"La

Doctrine

d'Origne

sur la

Pnitence",

Recherches de Science

Religieuse

37

(1950)

92. On

the life of the

baptized

as a moral

process

see

Hauschild,

Gottes Geist und der

Mensch,

106-109.

124

OFP

3, 5,

8;

SC

268:

234.

125

Gott und

unsere

Erlsung

im Glauben der Alien

Kirche,

110. Studer refers to OFP

1, 3,

5 ff.

126

The

Panegyric

on

Origen

9, 115-10, 127;

SC 148: 142-148.

127

Address to the Greeks, 13; PG 6: 834. Hauschild places Tatian among the theolo

gians

of the second

century

for whom the

Spirit

had the

greatest

importance;

Gottes

Geist


18/31

22

KILIAN

McDONNELL,

OSB

Rome

(fi.

ca

96],

and Pastor Hermas

[2nd

c.]128.

Stili others

retrain the

rhetoric

of

"the

worthy"

even while

abandoning

the

theological

position

Origen

represents.

Repeatedly

Basii relates the

Spirit

to

the

worthy129.

He,

together

with

Gregory

of

Nyssa

and

Athanasius,

relates the

Spirit

more

to

the rites of Christian

initiation than does

Origen,

orienting

their

pneumatology

less to the ascetic church

and

more

to the

body

of Christ

ian

believers130,

though

I

have

already

cited a text where

the relation of

the

Spirit

to

baptism

is of some

significance131.

Origen

manifests this elitist

strain also in his

teaching

on the char

isms, restricting them to the worthy132,a position very close to that

which

Syrian theologians,

such as Philoxenus of

Mabbug (ca, 440-523),

will later elaborate133. In

Origen

those

possessing

these charisms

have

the

vocation of

elaborating

the

apostolic

truths,

which the

apostles

stated,

but left

open

as to

"how or

why"134.

The

more

worthy

merit "the

higher gifts

of

the

Spirit"

(wisdom, knowledge,

faith,

in that

order);

thus

equipped

they investigate

these areas

undetermined

by

apostolic

authority135.

Besides the evident

pneumatological

content,

charisms

also have

christological

and

trinitarian

dimensions136.

Origen

discusses

und der

Mensch,

20;

W.

Cramer,

Der Geist Gottes

und des

Menschen

in

friisyrischer

Theologie

(Munster:

Aschendorff,

1979)

55, 57,

58.

128

.

,

Urspriinge friihkatholischer

Pneumatologie (Berlin: Evangelische

Ver

lagsanstalt, 1960)

136,

151.

129

On the

Holy

Spirit

9:

22;

18:

46;

22:

53;

26:

61, 62;

SC 17 bis:

326, 410, 442,

468,

472.

130

Basii,

On the

Holy

Spirit

10:

24;

17:

43;

24:

55;

25:

60;

29:

71;

SC 17 bis:

332, 398,

450,462,502.

Gregory of

Nyssa,

Against

the Macedonians

19; GNO, 3/1,102,103.

Atha

nasius,

Letters to

Serapion

1:

29-30;

SC 15:

135-139;

Athanasius,

Orations

Against

the

Arians 2:

42-43;

PG 26:236-240. Due

regard

should be

given

to one text of

Origen's

already

mentioned

above,

OFP

1,

3,

2 whose

authenticity

has been

challenged (SC

253:

58,

note

10).

131 OFP 1, 3, 2; SC 252: 146. See SC 253: 58 note 10.

132

OFP

1,3,8;

SC 252:162.

Origen speaks

of the charisms

given

"either

by

baptism

or

the

grace

of the

Spirit".

OFP

2, 10, 7;

SC 252: 390. Crouzel remarks that

Origen's

teaching

on the charisms does not fall into a neat framework.

Origne

et la "connaissance

mystique', (Paris:

Desclee

de

Brouwer,

1961)

126.

133

Kilian

McDonnell,

George

Montague,

Christian Initiation and

Baptism

in the

Holy Spirit (Collegeville:

Glazier,

1991)

266-305.

134

OFP

1, Preface, 3;

SC 252:

78,

80.

135

Ibid.;

Against

Celsus 3:

46; 6:13;

SC

136:110;

SC147:210. These charisms are of a

higher

noetic

order,

while miracles and

healings

are

placed

lower.

136

Homilies

on Jeremias 8:

5,25;

SC

232:

368.

The charism of

wisdom,

a

participation

in the Wisdom of

God,

in the

Son,

allows one to know

by connaturality.

"... the

only

begotten

Son

of God is God's wisdom

hypostatically existing".

OFP

1, 2, 2;

Se 252: 112.

See SC 253: 34, note 8. Crouzel, Origne et la "connaissance mystique" 119-124; Crouzel,

"Origne",

Dictionnaire de

Spiritualit

11: 942.


19/31

DOES ORIGEN HA VE A TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE

OF

THE HOLY SPIRIT?

23

charisms in a section of the

Commentary

on John devoted to

the

Holy

Spirit,

and

identifies the

Spirit

as the

"matter"

or "substance"

(hyle)

of

the

charisms;

however,

they

are

"produced by

God,

procured by

Christ,

and

subsist

according

to the

Holy Spirit", demonstrating

both the

spe

cial work

of

the

Spirit

and the

unity

of

the

triune

act,

a

point

of some

sophistication137.

He

immediately

refers

to Paul's triadic formulation

concerning

varieties of

charisms, services, ministries,

but the same

Spir

it,

Lord,

and God

(1

Cor

12:1,5)138.

In some

way

he refers twelve times

in On First

Principles

to Paul's

list of

charisms

in 1 Corinthians

12139.

An

Imperiai

Logos:

Origen

attempts

to

give

an identifiable charac

ter to each

person by recognizing

the

specific

work each does. When

describing

the work of the

Spirit

he

singles

out

inspiring

the

scriptures140, mparting

the

charisms141,

giving

insight

into

the

meaning

of

scripture142,

nd

sanctifying

the

saints143.

Moreover,

the

Spirit

is the

wisdom of God in the inner senses

(hearing, seeing, touching,

smelling,

tasting)144,

the

Spirit

mediating145,

and

effecting

the incarnation146. Ex

cept

for

the

last,

the

Logos

has identical functions.

Because there is no

difference in

Origen

between revelation and

inspiration,

the

Logos

is

also the

inspirer

of

scripture,

"the sole

perfect body

of the

Word"147.

By

a

connaturality given through participation

in the charism of

Wisdom,

who is the

Son,

the

worthy

have

insight

into

the

depths

of God148.

The

Logos

also sanctifies149.

Through

its

many

forms

the

Logos

is

the ascent

137

CSJ

2,

10, 73-77;

SC 120:

252-256.

138

SC 120:

252,

footnote 1.

139

Preface

4

and

8; 1,3,7,

three; 1,3,8, twice; 2,1,3;

2,7,3; 2,10,7;

3,1,17.

See SC

312: 63.

140

Qpp

preface> 8;

sc 252:

84,86.

In this

and the

following paragraph

I am

follow

ing Hauschild,

Gottes Geist

und der

Mensch, 137,

138.

141

CSJ

2,10, 77;

SC

120:

256;

OFP1,3,8; 2,7,3;

SC

252:162,330;

Against

Celsus 3:

18;

SC 136:

46;

7:

23;

SC 150: 68.

142

OFP

2,

7,

2;

SC 252:

328,

330.

143

OFP

1,

3, 7;

SC 252: 158.

144

Homilies

on Exodus 3:

2;

SC

321:

92.

Though

there

is

pneumatological

content to

his

teaching

on

the inner

senses,

most of

it

is

christological.

K.

Rahner,

"Le dbut

d'une

doctrine des

cinq

sens

spirituels

chez

Origne",

Revue

d'Asctique

et de

Mystique

13

(1932)

113-145;

.

Harl,

"La 'bouche'

et le 'coeur'

de

l'aptre:

deux

images bibliques

du 'sens

divin' de l'homme

('Proverbes' 2,5)

chez

Origne",

Forma

Futuri: Studi

in onore

del Cardi

nale Michele

Pellegrino (Turin:

Bottega

d'Erasmo,

1975)

19-42.

145

Homilies

on Joshua 9:

2;

SC

71: 248.

146

OFP

1,

Preface,

4: SC 252: 80.

147

Frangment

of

Homily

on Jeremiah

39;

PG 13: 544

c.

148 Homilies on Exodus 3: 1; SC 321: 88, 90; OFP 3, 3, 1; SC 268: 182, 184.

149

CSJ

1,

34,

241-251;

SC 120:

182, 184;

Homilies

on

Numbers 11:

9;

SC 29:

229.


20/31

24

K1LIAN

McDONNELL,

OSB

to the

knowledge

of the Father150. Of

course,

the

Logos

is

a mediator151.

Beyond

these functions

of the

Logos

the Father created the uni

verse

after the

model

of,

and with the

agency

of,

the

Logos.

In

ali,

Origen

has about one hundred titles

(epinoiai)

for

Christ,

among

them:

Logos,

Wisdom, Life,

Light,

Resurrection, Truth, Power,

Justice,

Lamb,

First

Born,

Chosen

Arrow,

Vine,

Bread of

Life152.

Beyond

the

iconic function of

the

creator

Logos/Son,

the Word is the restorer

of

the

lost

image153.

To the

Word

Origen

ascribes the work

of

revealing154,

illuminating155,

and

perfecting156.

Ali

things, including

the

Spirit,

come

into

being

(in

the sense

explained

above) through

the Word157.

Moving

away

from

specifics,

one

gets

a

quick

impression

of

the

all-pervading

work of

the Word

by paging through

the

anthology

of

Origen's writings

by

Flans Urs

von

Balthasar,

newly

edited

by

R.J.

Daly,

where each

occurrence of "Word" is

printed

in

capital

lettere158.

Origen

has erected

a

Logos imperium.

God delivered ali to the Son.

Unity,

Proprium,

and the Whole

Trinity:

In

spite

of the

imperiai

Logos Origen

moves to

safeguard

the

trinity

from a

complete Logos

takeover. He writes of the

special

work

(proprium)

each

person per

forms.

Then

he

draws attention

to

the

rhythm

of

specific acts, having

their source in the

Father,

moving through

the Son to the

Spirit,

thus

emphasizing

the

monarchian,

trinitarian

unity

of ali

God's acts159.

No

person

acts in isolation from the others. At the

very

beginning

of trinita

rian

Documents

Kilian McDonnell - Does Origen Have a Trinitarian Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Gregorianum, Vol. 75, No. 1. 1994..pdf