Day 15: ANF09 Book II.1-3 or FC80 Book II.1-33

[Nemo]

and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

1. What are the four orders in relation to "God", and in relation to "Word"?

[Clark]

Sorry for falling behind and being silent.

In my own mind I am connecting paragraphs 27-31 with some previous mentions of spiritually pure people, mentions that seemed to float in midair. Maybe these paragraphs give them a roosting place. :-)

I see two parallel hierarchies each with four items. Paragraph 27 lists four groups of people, each of which is related to God in a certain way. Paragraphs 28-31 list four groups of people, each of which participates in the Word in a certain way.

Paragraph 28 describes the first rank in the second hierarchy: 'So, then, some participate in the Word “in the beginning” himself, even the Word “with God” and “God” the Word, as Osee and Isaias and Jeremias and any other who has proven himself to be such that “the Word of the Lord”39 or “the Word” has come to him.'

I assume they also are in the first rank in the first hierarch, namely, 'Some, therefore, have the God of the universe as God.'

It seems that I, as a baptized believer, fall into the second level in each hierarchy. 'Such is the multitude of those who are considered to have believed.' But maybe not.

I'm going to post this and then separately scare up the mentions I noticed before and post them.

[Clark]

I am not talking about some mechanical, direct equivalence. But I bumped into references to people who were really, really spiritual and I wondered who they are. So maybe these parallel four-level hierarchies tell something about who they are.

The first of the mentions that left an itch in my mind was early -- Book I, paragraphs 10-11.

'Most of us who approach the teachings of Christ, since we have much time for the activities of life and offer a few acts to God, would perhaps be those from the tribes who have a little fellowship with the priests and support the service of God in a few things. But those who devote themselves to the divine Word and truly exist by the service of God alone will properly be said to be Levites and priests in accordance with the excellence of their activities in this work. (11) And, perhaps, those who excel all others and who hold, as it were, the first places of their generation will be high priests according to the order of Aaron, but not according to the order of Melchisedech.'

In that passage Origen puts "most of us" into the group of regular folks but points at some higher or more spiritual group, 'who excel all others and who hold, as it were, the first places of their generation.'

When I read that passage I wanted Origen to give me more info about who those special people might be - examples or some definition or details. But Origen goes elsewhere at that point.

I also wondered whether Origen was really excluding himself from that special group. :-) He seems to have spent all his time on God-related stuff, being supported financially by Ambrose. It seems reasonable to me to describe him as one of those holding the first places in that generation. But it would seem not-humble to describe himself that way.

[Clark]

Book I, paragraph 24: 'How great, then, must be our understanding, that we may be able to understand in a worthy manner the word which is stored up in the earthen treasures of paltry language, whose written character is read by all who happen upon it, and whose sound is heard by all who present their physical ears? What also must we say? For he who will understand these matters accurately must say truthfully, “But we have the mind of Christ, that we may know the graces that have been given us by God.”'

This seems to describe two groups of people - those who perceive or understand the written/read-aloud words in a simple, direct sense (that is, most Christians), and those who have the mind of Christ and "understand these matters accurately." And it seems he is including himself and his audience ("we") in the second group, that this book "understands these matters accurately" or at least attempts to do so.

I'm loosely correlating these true seers with the first rank of folks in Book II, and the bulk of Christians in the second rank there.

[Clark]

Book I paragraphs 43-45 seem again to describe two groups or levels of Christians: 'This is why we must live as a Christian in a spiritual and in a physical manner. And wherever it is necessary to preach the literal gospel declaring among the carnal that we “know nothing except Jesus Christ, and him crucified,” we must do this. But whenever we find those who are established in the Spirit and are bearing fruit in him and desiring the heavenly wisdom, we ought to share with them the Word who was restored from being made flesh to what “he was in the beginning with God.”

'(44) We do not think our discussion was in vain when we examined these matters about the gospel, distinguishing in concept, as it were, the gospel which is perceptible by the senses from the intelligible and spiritual gospel.

'(45) And, indeed, the task before us now is to translate the gospel perceptible to the senses into the spiritual gospel. For what is the interpretation of the gospel perceptible to the senses unless it is translated into the spiritual gospel? It is little or nothing, even though the common people believe they receive the things which are revealed from the literal sense.

It seems there are "the carnal," who "know nothing except Jesus Christ, and him crucified." They are "the common people." This description reminds me of Book II paragraph 29, which describes the second rank in one of the hierarchies: 'But second are those who have known nothing “except Jesus Christ and him crucified,” having supposed that the Word which became flesh was the totality of the Word, who know Christ only according to the flesh.42 Such is the multitude of those who are considered to have believed.'

"We" (Origen and his readers), have the task of truly understanding the meanings of the words that we have received as lifeless marks on a flat surface. Maybe "we" are level 1.5, somewhere between the common folk and Hosea et al.?

FWIW I count myself among the common people.

[Clark]

At the end of Book I paragraph 68 we encounter a perhaps interesting group of sentient beings: 'Consequently, every good deed which we perform for our neighbor is taken up into the gospel which is written in the tablets of heaven and read by all those worthy of knowledge of all things.' (Italics added)

[Clark]

Book I paragraphs 198-199: 'Just as there are some, then, of whom Christ is shepherd because, as we said previously, they are meek and tranquil, and more irrational, so also there are some over whom he is king insofar as they approach piety in a more rational manner. (199) There are also differences between those who are governed by a king. They are governed either in a manner that is more mystical, esoteric and worthy of God, or in a manner that is inferior.'

Two ranks or layers.

(FWIW "rational" and "irrational" here are almost certainly based on the root "logos" but I haven't verified that.)

[Clark]

Final caveat for today: I'm not proposing that Origen has defined in detail some sort of clear hierarchical classification system that he applies consistently in all contexts.

[Nemo]

Clark wrote: "Final caveat for today: I'm not proposing that Origen has defined in detail some sort of clear hierarchical classification system that he applies consistently in all contexts."

I also think Origen set up this type of hierarchy not for its own sake, but for the sake of the readers, i.e., to draw us upwards, that we may not remain bottom feeders, but ascend to most blessed state of contemplation.

[Clark]

In Book II paragraph 13 Origen says: 'John has used the articles in one place and omitted them in another very precisely, and not as though he did not understand the precision of the Greek language.'

I decided to read these verses in a recent translation, The New Testament: A Translationhttps://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...

It turns out that that translator thought the presence or absence of the definite article was significant and he worked hard to have his translation reflect it. He wrote a long note explaining his thinking.

So Origen's interest in the definite article wasn't just his alone.

[Clark]

I add another paragraph to the above collection of Origen describing different rational-spiritual persons (perhaps not only humans) who read Scripture or the spiritual realities well or less well, with greater or lesser understanding.

Book II paragraph 267: 'But once one has discovered each of these [typological explanations of the animals that are sacrificed in the OT], it is a task which far surpasses human nature to be able to understand the truth of the spiritual law which has come through Jesus Christ. This is a task for none other than the perfect man who has “by practise his senses exercised to the discerning of good and evil,” who is able to say from his truthful disposition, “But we speak wisdom among the perfect.” It is possible to say truthfully of these matters and matters like them: “Which none of the princes of this world knew.'

I'm just adding this item to the collection. I'm not attempting to integrate it into the collection or to analyze the collection, just to note what is apparently another example/passage.