Bonovox

An Invitation to Divine Vision

 The 15^th Chapter of the collections of Origen of Alexandria’s writings called the “Philocalia,” (“love of the beautiful”) is at its heart an invitation; an invitation to leave the world of the base and the mundane, to enter a higher place; a place where it is all love, truth and beauty. And the best part is, is that is all the same world.

Origen of course, was both the most controversial as well as being the most prolific of the Church Fathers. He is counted as a Church Father, not only because he was indeed a highly esteemed authority within the Church at his time, but also because he basically died a martyr’s death; only the long delay between his torments and his finally succumbing to them, prevented him from being acclaimed with the martyr’s crown. But some of his ideas are controversial, and eventually, years after his death he was condemned along with ideas that were referred to as “Origenism.” But it cannot be denied that he both articulated the theology of his time, and influenced its future. As John Anthony McGuckin states, “All of the great thinkers of the patristic age were in his debt, and even after his condemnation he was too deeply inserted into the fabric of Christian theologizing ever to be dismissed or forgotten[1].”

He was also highly productive in the number of writings he put out. This of course led only to even great influence when coupled with the quality of his writing. He is said to have left over 6,000 different writings before his death. Unfortunately most of his writings were destroyed when his teachings were condemned. Thankfully, along with several complete documents that have survived until our time is a compilation of some of the writings of Origen, alleged to have been compiled and edited by SS. Gregory of Naziansus and Basil of Caesarea, known as the Philocalia[2]. It is to the Philocalia, that we now turn our attention, particularly the section known as the 15^th Chapter.

Chapter Fifteen, a compilation of abstracts, is pulled from a long discourse of Origen’s “Against Celsus” (Contra Celsum). Celsus was an early antagonist of Christianity. He was a philosopher who was either a Platonist or an Epicurean. Celsus’ argument against Christianity, as present in Chapter Fifteen is twofold: First, the crude style of the Hebrew Scriptures was not as able to communicate any “noble truths” that may have been present, as has the ornate polished style of the Greeks. And secondly, that the body of the Lord was “unsightly.” The editors of Philocalia have Origen address the former in Part One of this chapter (paragraphs 1-11) and the latter in the second part (12-20). Let’s look at part one.

Origen, in stating his reason for writing, quotes Celsus as alleging that the ideas in Scriptures have been “better expressed among the Greeks, and without the violent expedient of a message supposed to have come from God or from the Son of God.” (Philo. chp. 15, par. 1) In other words, ”don’t bother us with your tales of prophets, and burning bushes and insignificant kings; our philosophers preach about being virtuous, in a much more elegant manner.” This notion to Origen, was a like a big fat pitch in the center of the plate, just dying to be hit out of the park. And so he swings, and connects.

Origen is not content to merely rebut these charges, by perhaps showing that the Scriptures are “not” crude; he’s willing to concede the point, that perhaps they are, but that there is something more important beyond style. He says,

“Now we maintain that if the aim of those who represent the truth is to do as much good as possible to as many as possible, and out of love for men to win over to the truth, as far as may be, every single man, not only the quick and the ready, but also him that is void of understanding .” (Ibid.)

The goal is to “win as many as possible.” Therefore, the communication has a goal, and a meaning. And to communicate to him who is “void of understanding,” will require a different approach then to the one who is learned in languages and philosophy. It is to this aim, Origen says,

“Our prophets, and Jesus and His Apostles had the insight to adopt a mode of delivery which not only conveys the truth, but can win the many, until they are drawn to be Catechumens and then, every one so far as he can, rise to the ineffable mysteries contained in this seemingly poor language.” (Phil. 15:2)

So this “seemingly poor language,” not only can convey the truth and win many, but can draw them to commit themselves to the Church and “rise to the ineffable mysteries.” This is in contrast to what Origen sees happening with the ornate and polished style of “Plato and his imitators.”

Origen, himself being trained in the thought of the great philosophers, doesn’t totally besmirch them, but does hold them in contempt; his sarcastic appraisement of them, is really pretty funny. He says that this sophisticated style only “benefits a few, if it indeed does benefit them.” (Ibid.)(emphasis mine) He then adds, “We do not say this to disparage Plato, for the great world of men has found even him useful.” (Ibid.) (again emphasis mine) Origen is not saying that there is no benefit to the philosophy and learning of the Greeks; but that the thought of the philosophers could only enlighten the minds of those who had the luxury of being trained in its vocabulary and thought processes. The words of the Scriptures benefit all.

Origen stresses that to “rise to the ineffable mysteries,” what is said is not sufficient, no matter how true and persuasive. But rather, “…a certain power from God be given to the speaker and grace be shed over his words, and effective speakers cannot have this grace without God’s help.” (Phil 15.4) There is something beyond the text alone that enlightens the reader. What might it be?

The Greek philosophers wrangled over questions of purpose and meaning. Origen refers to Plato’s views on the Chief Good, and agrees that it is “…by no means communicable in word, but is acquired through much intercourse with it, and, kindled as it were from flaming fire, suddenly illuminating the soul.” (Phil. 15.5) The Chief Good, can be touched on by men in their intellectual ponderings. But Plato himself attests that words can’t communicate it. It can only be grasped by encountering it on its own terms; then it is the Chief Good itself (or “Himself” for the Christian) that becomes the subject, actively setting on fire the soul of the seeker.

He adds to this a quote from St. Paul, “For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity.” (Phil. 15.5) The “things that are made,” are not an end to themselves, but an aid to seeing the “invisible things,” the things that are “not made.”

Origen then lists the numerous verses in the Scriptures that support this idea of a “…sudden

kindling in the soul of a burning light.” But then states,

“Observe then, the difference between Plato’s fine saying respecting the Chief Good, and what was said in the Prophets considering the light of the blessed, and observe further that the truth in Plato concerning the Chief Good did not at all help his readers to attain to pure and undefiled religion; and what is more, it did not benefit the philosopher himself who thus expounded the Chief Good.”(Phil. 15.7)

Based upon Plato’s own criteria, there must be something more than the words, if we are to attain to the “Chief Good.”

Origen closes this section by referring to a synergy between God and reader of Scriptures.

“Just so, the Divine Nature taking thought not only for those who are reputed learned among the Greeks, but also for the rest of the Greeks, condescended to the ignorance of the majority of hearers, so that, employing words familiar to them, it aright encourages the unlearned multitude to hearken; for after the first introduction they can easily endeavor to get a hold on the deeper truths hidden in the Scriptures. For even an ordinary reader soon discovers that many passages have a deeper significance than appears on the surface, a signification revealed to devoted students of the Word, and revealed in proportion to the time they spend upon the Word and to their zeal into putting into practice what they read.” (Phil. 15.10)

According to Origen, the Scriptures are not like other books in that God, the Divine Nature was behind their origin, and was so directing their writing that they teach the unlearned. But to benefit, the reader must be a “devoted student,” and “put into practice what they read.” Then the deeper significance of the Scriptures will be revealed to them. And it is Christ that is the focus, and deeper significance of the Scriptures.

Christ is more specifically the focus of the second section of chapter 15. Origen quotes Celsus as referring to Christ’s body as “small, ill-favored, and ignoble.” Origen easily refutes this by pointing out how Celsus will quote Scripture “as if he believed such of them to justify the charge; but wherever, in the same Scriptures, anyone might suppose the opposite of what constitutes the charge to be asserted, Celsus professes not to know it.” (Phil. 15.12) Origen points out that Celsus employs Is. 53:1,2[3] to support his position, while totally ignoring such verses as Ps 44:4,[4] which refers to the grace and beauty of “the Mighty One.”

Origen goes further in refuting Celsus in many ways, particularly pointing out the irony of Celsus’ use of a prophecy about Jesus given hundreds of years before, assuming the reliability of it! If the prophecy can be seen as reliable, that only goes to support that idea that Jesus is the Christ, the Holy One of God, who was foretold by the prophets.

Origen points out that Celsus is missing the fact that Christ appeared differently to different people at different times:

How came Celsus to overlook the fact that our Lord’s body varied according to the capacity of the observers, and that a useful purpose was served when its appearance was such as was necessary for each individual? And it is nothing wonderful that matter, by nature mutable and variable and convertible to everything the Creator chooses, and receptive of every quality the Artificer desires, should sometimes have a quality corresponding to the descriptions, “He hath neither form nor beauty,” and sometimes should be so glorious, astonishing, and marvelous, that the three Apostles who ascended the Mount with Jesus at the sight of such wondrous beauty fell upon their faces .(Phil. 15.14)

God created matter, so it should not be surprising that it should serve his purposes. It is true at the same time, that He “hath no form or beauty,” and that the disciples fell on their faces at the sight of his wondrous beauty. It is “the capacity of the observers,” that is the key in tipping off, how they shall observe Him. But to what purpose, and what is the determinant of “capacity?”

Origen’s main thrust in this writing, is to show that if at times, the Christ seem humble and lowly, it is only to meet the viewer where he is at; to condescend to a level where He can be glimpsed, in the ultimate goal of bringing him to where Christ (God) can be seen in all His Glory. “For in the eyes of those who are below and are not yet ready for the ascent, the Word hath neither form nor beauty; to such as these its form is without honor, and marred more than the words ‘born of men,’ in the passage before us figuratively called ‘sons of men’” (Phil. 15.18) In the same paragraph he then states, “But for those who through obeying Him even when He ascends the lofty mountain, He hath a Diviner appearance.” (Ibid.) We see him as a man, with the frailty and limitedness of a Man. But through obedience, we are able to be brought with Him as He ascends to the Father, and see Him in His glory.

After all, as Origen points out, this is all about the incarnation; the Word of God Himself taking on garments of flesh. “And down below the Word has other garments; they are not white, they are not like the light; if thou shalt ascend to the lofty mountain, thou shalt see His light and His garments.” (Phil. 15.19) This is the purpose; to ascend with Him and thus see His light and garments.

“As then down below He looks different, but having ascended is transfigured, His face beaming like the sun, so it is with His clothing, so it is with His garments. When thou art below, they do not shine, they are not white; but if thou ascend, thou shalt see the beauty and the light of the garments, and shalt marvel at the transfigured face of Jesus.” (Ibid.)

It’s the “ascending” that is important. We see Him in one way, that we might see Him in another.

Origen offers St. Paul as an example of the goal; of leaving “our world of earth” so that we can be “rapt into the third heaven.” We must get beyond the world that we see with our physical eyes, to that we see with our spiritual. “Wherefore we see the Word of God on earth, for that He became man, in human guise … that He might tabernacle among us. But if we recline on the bosom of the Word made flesh and are able to follow Him when He ascends the lofty mountain, we shall say, ‘We saw his glory.’” (Phil. 15.19) By becoming intimate with the Word made flesh, We are given the chance to see His glory.

Origen wraps up this section, by uniting both sections of this chapter in that the Scriptures are ultimately about the Word of God. “They, who are able to walk in the footsteps of Jesus as He ascends, and is transfigured out of sight of earth, shall behold his transfiguration in every scripture. “ (Ibid.) This then is the point of both the Scriptures and of whom the Scriptures proclaim.

In fact, it is the Scriptures, that Origen says Christ is robed in: “The garments of the Word are the phrases of Scripture; The Divine thoughts are clothed in these expressions.” (Ibid.) Thus the apparent lowliness of Christ’s appearance corresponds to the apparent lowliness of the Scriptures. And it both of these, that are transformed, or rather the reader and viewer’s eyes are transformed, so that he can see the Truth and Beauty proclaimed in the Scritpures, and manifested in He whom the Scritpures proclaim, The Word of God Himself. As Fr. John Behr says, “The difference between seeing Jesus as an ordinary man and contemplating him transfigured in divine glory is that of merely reading the words of Scripture, expressed in the common idiom, and understanding their divine content.”[5]

We cannot touch this mystery, of the Divine revelation, without desiring to see it. You cannot see it without a love of truth. “But how can Celsus and the enemies of the Divine Word, and such as do not investigate Christianity with a love of truth,, know the meaning of the different appearances of Jesus? (Philo. 15.20) Just as the Scriptures are more than the “crude text” as it appears to Celsus, so too is Jesus more than “ill-favored and ignoble.” The love of truth is what makes the difference.

I submit that it is this, “investigating Christianity with the love of truth,” that is important about this writing by Origen, rather then what it appears to be on first read: a defense of the “crude style” of the scriptures. It is indeed an invitation to all who reads the Scriptures and considers the Christ. With a love of truth, one can read rise with St. Paul into the third heaven and marvel at the transfigured face of Christ.

[1] John Anthony McGuckin, The Westminster Handbook to Origen (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press), 26.

[2] Not to be confused with later compilation of spiritual treatises known as the Philokalia

[3] “Lord who hath believed our report? And to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? For He grew up before him as a tender plant, as a root in a dry ground: he hath no form (nor glory: and we saw him and he had no form) nor comeliness; but his form was unhonored, marred more than the sons of men.”

[4] “Gird thy Sword upon thy thigh O Mighty One, in thy grace and beauty, and in thy majesty ride on prosperously.”

[5] John Behr, The Way to Nicea (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001), 180.