us showed, stood on the shore, walked on the journey with A Cleopas, and said that He had flesh and bones. That body excels in other privileges, because it was not born from the seed of a man and the pleasure of the flesh. He ate and drank after His resurrection, and appeared clothed, and offered Himself to be touched, so that He might give faith of the resurrection to the doubting apostles. But yet He does not hide the nature of an aerial and spiritual body. For He enters with the doors closed, and vanishes from their eyes in the breaking of bread. Therefore, will we also have to drink and eat after the resurrection, and after food to excrete waste? And where will that promise be: «This mortal must put on immortality» 63?
FRAGMENTS FROM THE BOOKS OF ORIGEN'S STROMATA
Eusebius, book VI *Hist. eccl.*, chap. 18, after he narrated that Ambrose, who followed the heresy of Valentinus, was convicted by the power of the truth which Origen taught, and passed to the profession of the right faith which was preached in the Church, adds: «Kai ἄλλοι δὲ πλείους τῶν ἀπὸ παιδείας, τῆς περὶ τὸν Ὠριγένην φήμης πανταχόσε βιωμένης, ᾔεσαν ὡς αὐτὸν, πεῖραν τῆς ἐν τοῖς ἱεροῖς λόγοις ἱκανότητος τ' ἀνδρὸς ληψόμενοι· μυρίοι τε τῶν αἱρετικῶν, φιλοσόφων τε τῶν μάλιστα ἐπιφανῶν οὐκ ὀλίγοι διὰ σπουδῆς αὐτῷ προσεῖχον, μονονουχὶ πρὸς τοῖς θείοις, καὶ τὰ τῆς ἔξωθεν φιλοσοφίας πρὸς αὐτοῦ παιδευόμενοι. Εἰσηγέ τε γὰρ ὅσους εὐφυῶς ἔχοντας ἑώρα καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ φιλόσοφα μαθήματα γεωμετρίαν καὶ ἀριθμητικὴν, καὶ τὰ ἄλλα προπαιδεύματα παραδιδούς· εἰς τε τὰς αἱρέσεις τὰς παρὰ τοῖς φιλοσόφοις προάγων, καὶ τὰ παρὰ τούτοις συγγράμματα διηγούμενος, ὑπομνηματιζόμενός τε, καὶ θεωρῶν εἰς ἕκαστα· ὥστε μέγαν καὶ παρ' αὐτοῖς Ἕλλησι φιλόσοφον τὸν ἄνδρα κηρύττεσθαι.» Many other learned men, lured by the fame of Origen which was spread everywhere, flocked to him, to make a trial of that man's skill in the sacred letters. Innumerable heretics, moreover, and not a few of the illustrious philosophers, listened to him studiously: and besides the knowledge of divine things, they also received the precepts of Greek philosophy from him as if they were disciples. For whomever of his disciples he noticed were endowed with skill and sharpness of mind, he introduced them into philosophy, teaching them geometry, and arithmetic, and other preliminary disciplines; then leading them to the various sects of philosophers, and explaining the books written by the ancient philosophers; writing commentaries also on each, and deeply inquiring into the hidden meanings; so that he was proclaimed a great philosopher even among the Gentiles themselves. Furthermore, it is very likely from Jerome's epistle 83, otherwise 84, that these commentaries of Origen on the books of each of the ancient philosophers were either nothing other than the books themselves inscribed *Stromateis*, ten in number, or at least that they were the principal material of the *Stromateis*, in which he says: «Imitating this one (Clement of Alexandria), Origen wrote ten *Stromateas*, comparing the opinions of Christians and philosophers among themselves, and confirming all the dogmas of our religion from Plato and Aristotle, Numenius and Cornutus.»
Eusebius, book VI *Hist. eccles.*, chap. 24, teaches at what time and where they were written: «Καὶ τοὺς ἐπιγεγραμμένους Στρωματεῖς, ὄντας τὸν ἀριθμὸν δέκα, ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτῆς πόλεως (Ἀλεξανδρείας) κατὰ τὴν Ἀλεξάνδρου συντάττει βασιλείαν, ὡς καὶ τοῦτο ὁλόγραφοι δηλοῦσιν αὐτοῦ πρὸ τῶν τόμων ἐπισημειώσεις.» But he also wrote the books which are inscribed *Stromateis*, ten in number, in the same city (Alexandria) in the times of the emperor Alexander, as the notations written in his own hand and prefixed to the books themselves testify.
Origen himself cites the third book of this work in volume XII on John with these words: «Ὡς καὶ ἐν τῷ τρίτῳ τῶν Στρωματέων παρεστήσαμεν διηγούμενοι τὸ, Ὁ Πατήρ σου ὁ βλέπων ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ, ἀποδώσει σοι.» As we explained in the third book of the *Stromata*, expounding that (Matt. VI, 4): «Your Father who sees in secret, will reward you.» Jerome commemorates the fifth in book IV of his *Commentary on Jeremiah*, chap. XXII, where, expounding verse 24: «As I live, says the Lord, if Chonias the son of Joakim king of Judah were a ring on my right hand, in that day I will pluck him out, etc.» He has these things: «Now I say to him (Jovinian) who is dead, and to this one (Rufinus) who lives, and tries to restore heresy, that their master Origen refers this to Christ, that He was plucked out like a ring from the hand of God the Father and sent into the land of captivity into the valley of tears, and handed over to the cross; his mother also, without doubt the Synagogue, captured and cast out. And he does not fear, while commemorating these things, what follows: Earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the Lord. Thus says the Lord: Write this man as abominable or sterile, and the rest, to understand it of the Lord of majesty. He writes this, however, lest his disciples dare to deny it, in the fifth book of the *Stromata*.» The same Jerome, epistle 41, otherwise 65, mentions the sixth book of the *Stromateis*, and asserts in it that Origen teaches perjuries and lies: «But that the Origenists are bound among themselves by the orgies of perjuries and lies, the sixth book of the *Stromateis*, in which he confirms our dogma from the opinion of Plato, teaches most plainly.» And in book I against Rufinus, «They are indignant, he says, why I wrote that the Origenists are bound among themselves by the orgies of lies. I named the book in which I read this written, that is, the sixth book of Origen's *Stromateis*, in which, composing our dogma to the opinion of Plato, he speaks thus.» Soon Jerome brings forward the very place of Origen which follows this warning, and afterwards adds: «Origen wrote these things, we cannot deny it: he wrote in the books which he was speaking to the perfect and to his disciples: and he teaches that masters should lie; but that disciples ought not to lie. Therefore, he who lies well, and without any shame fabricates whatever comes into his mouth against his brothers, proves himself an excellent master.» Jerome mentions the tenth volume more often: 1° *Commentary on Daniel*, chap. XIII, where he brings forward a distinguished fragment concerning the histories of Susanna and Bel, which you will find edited in the second place after this warning; 2° *Preface to the Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians*, where he says: «That man (Origen) wrote five volumes of his own on the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians, and completed the tenth book of his *Stromata* with a brief sermon on the explanation of it;» 3° epistle 74, otherwise 89, to St. Augustine, he says that Origen, in the tenth book of the *Stromata*, where he interprets the Epistle to the Galatians, first introduced that explanation which he had given on Gal. II, 14, and by which he contended that Peter was feignedly rebuked by Paul; 4° in the third book of his *Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians*, chap. V, the holy doctor exhibits a very long passage from the same volume of Origen's *Stromateis*, edited below in the third place.
FROM THE STROMATA BOOKS OF ORIGEN.
A It remains now to note only this one thing: that Jerome includes these *Stromata* (Miscellanies) among those books that teemed with grave errors, especially regarding the resurrection, and which, for that reason, no one had dared to translate into Latin. See his Epistle 38 (otherwise 61), chapter 8, where he sets forth Origen’s dogma regarding the resurrection; and Epistle 41 (otherwise 65), in which he says: “One hundred and fifty years have nearly passed since Origen died at Tyre. Which of the Latins has ever dared to translate his books *On First Principles*, the *Stromata*, and *Tomus*; who has wished to become infamous through an infamous work?”
FROM THE SIXTH BOOK OF THE STROMATA OF ORIGEN (26).
39 Plato in the third book of *The Republic* says: “Truth loves the ambiguous, and sets forth what it wishes through enigmas, so that it might be greatly sought after as well. For if, as we were saying most correctly a short while ago, a lie is unseemly and useless to God, but sometimes useful to men, as a kind of seasoning and medicine, there is no doubt that such license should be granted to physicians, and withheld from the imprudent. ‘You speak truly,’ he says, ‘therefore the rulers of cities, if it is permitted to any others as well, must sometimes lie, even against enemies, or for the sake of the fatherland and the citizens.’” B And we, therefore, mindful of that precept, “Speak the truth, each one with his neighbor,” ought to ask, “Who is my neighbor?” But we must consider how the philosopher spoke cautiously: that a lie is unseemly and useless for God; sometimes useless for men; and that God must not be thought, even for the sake of a dispensation, to lie at any time. But if the benefit of the hearer demands it, [we may] speak with words, that the dignity of truth be preserved with Him; and that what could be harmful if brought forth naked into the public, might be brought forth covered by a certain veil. But the man upon whom the necessity of lying falls must attend diligently, so that he may sometimes use a lie as he would a seasoning or a medicine; so that he may preserve its measure, lest he exceed the limits observed by Judith against Holofernes, who defeated him by the prudent simulation of words. Let him imitate Esther, who corrected the sentence of Artaxerxes by keeping silent for a long time the truth of her people; C and first of all, patriarch Jacob, whom we read obtained the blessings of his father by a cunning lie. From which it is clear that, unless we have lied in such a way that some great good is sought by us from this, we are to be judged as enemies of Him who said: “I am the truth.”
FROM THE TENTH BOOK OF THE STROMATA OF ORIGEN (27).
“‘And there was a man living in Babylon, and his name was Joacim, and he took a wife named Susanna, the daughter of Helcia, very beautiful and fearing the Lord. And her parents, being just, had instructed their daughter according to the law of Moses.’ This testimony must be used for the exhortation of parents, that they might instruct [their children] according to the law of God and the divine word, not only the sons, but also the daughters. ‘Joacim was very rich, and he had a garden near his house,’ etc.” The Hebrew reported that these were Ahab and Zedekiah, of whom Jeremiah writes: “‘The Lord make you like Ahab and Zedekiah, whom the king of Babylon roasted in the fire because of the iniquity which they had done in Israel, and [because] they had committed adultery with the wives of their fellow citizens.’”
Of whom the Lord spoke: because iniquity went out from Babylon from the elder judges who seemed to rule the people. These frequented the house of Joacim, etc. Beautifully, regarding the sinful priests, he does not say: “who ruled the people,” but, “who D were seen to rule.” For those who well preside over the people, rule the people; but those who have only the name of judges and unjustly preside over the people, are seen to rule the people rather than ruling them.
“‘And she walked in the garden of her husband, and the elders saw her daily entering and walking, and they burned with concupiscence,’ etc.” What the Greeks call *pathos*, we interpret more correctly as “perturbation” rather than “passion.” This perturbation and desire of lust tickled, nay, struck the hearts of the elders. But in order that the foundation might lie in their souls, and they might think to fulfill their desires, they themselves overturned their own understanding; by which being overturned, their eyes were inclined, so that they did not see heavenly things, nor did they record just judgments, either of God, or of honesty, or of nature, which is implanted in all for good.
“‘And behold, Susanna walked,’” etc. It was already said before that Susanna walked in the morning. Nor is it incongruous, for the appeasing of those who...
carry out the work of the holy Scriptures seek examples, to assume this place of walking: because a man rightly walks to invigorate his little body (28). I have now set forth this passage from the Septuagint edition. “But when the maidens had gone out, two elders arose, that they might run to her,” etc. Whoever has reached the summit of perfect virtue never says that danger threatens him, if he has not fled the hands of adulterers, who say: “Consent to us, and lie with us. But if not, even if you are unwilling, we will bear witness against you that a young man was with you, and for this cause you dismissed the maidens from you.” For it is of human frailty to fear the death that is brought upon one for righteousness; unless perhaps we shall interpret the anguish not as that of impending death, but of the disgrace and ignominy with which she was to be covered by their accusing and saying: “A young man was with her, and for that reason she sent away the maidens.” For if I do this, it is death to me; but if I do not, etc. He calls sin death. Just as, therefore, to him who commits adultery, adultery is death; so every sin that leads to death must be called death. And we are believed to die as often as we sin unto death. Whence, conversely, we rise again and are brought to life as often as we perform works worthy of life.
B “But it is better for me to fall into your hands without the deed, than to sin in the sight of the Lord.” In the Greek, it does not read *αἱρετώτερον*, that is, *melius* (better), but *αἱρετόν*, which we can interpret as *bonum* (good). Whence he elegantly did not say: “It is better for me to fall into the hands of iniquitous presbyters than to sin in the sight of the Lord:” lest by a comparison of sin, which was not good, he might seem to call this better. But, “It is good,” he says, “for me not to do evil, and to fall into your hands, lest I sin in the sight of the Lord.” It is not, therefore, to be read by comparison: “It is better for me to fall into your hands than to sin in the sight of the Lord;” but absolutely: “It is good for me not to do evil and to fall into your hands, lest I sin in the sight of the Lord.” C “And Susanna cried out with a loud voice,” etc. It was a loud voice, not by the striking of the air and the clamor of the throat, but by the magnitude of the chastity through which she cried out to the Lord. Whence also Holy Scripture did not add “a loud voice” in the exclamation of the elders. For it follows: “And the elders cried out against her.” “And Susanna cried out with a loud voice,” etc. The affect of the heart, and the pure confession of the mind, and the goodness of conscience, had made her voice D more clear. Whence great was her exclamation, which was not heard by men. “And when he was being led to death, the Lord awakened the Holy Spirit of a young boy,” etc. By this discourse it is shown that the Holy Spirit had not entered into Daniel, but that He who was in him and was resting because of the infirmity of his age, and could not show His own works, was awakened by the Lord, given the occasion on behalf of a holy woman. “And he cried out with a loud voice: I am pure from the blood of this one,” etc. With the Holy Spirit awakened within him, and suggesting what the boy ought to say, his voice was loud. And it is to be noted wherever in the Holy Scriptures the voice of a sinner is called loud. “And when they were separated one from another, he called one of them,” etc. Because the Hebrews reject the history of Susanna (29), saying that it is not held in the volume of Daniel, we must inquire into the names *σχίνου* and *πρίνου*, which the Latins interpret as “holm-oak” and “lentisk,” whether they exist among the Hebrews, and what etymology they have, so that from *σχίνου* (shinos), “scission” (splitting), and from *πρίνου* (prinos), “section” or “sawing” is said in their language. But if it is not found, we shall be forced by necessity to acquiesce also in the opinion of those who wish this to be merely a Greek word-play (*περικοπή*), which has only a Greek etymology and does not have a Hebrew one. But if anyone shall show the etymology of the scission and section of these two trees to stand in the Hebrew, then we shall also be able to receive this Scripture. [E] “But all the synagogue cried out with a loud voice, and blessed God who saves those who hope in Him,” etc. If the whole synagogue killed them (30), that opinion seems to be refuted of which we spoke above, according to Jeremiah, that they were the presbyters Ahab and Zedekiah, unless perhaps we interpret this which is written: “They killed them,” for the fact that they handed them over to the king of Babylon to be killed. Just as we say also that the Jews killed the Savior; not that they struck Him themselves, but that they handed Him over to be killed and clamoring said: “Crucify, crucify Him.” “But Helcias and his wife praised God for their daughter Susanna,” etc. Worthily, as if saints, they praise God; not because Susanna was delivered from the hand of the presbyters, for this indeed is not sufficiently laudable, nor of great consequence if she had not been delivered, but because no shameful thing was found in her. “And immediately when he had opened the doors, looking at the things upon the table, he cried out with a loud voice: Great art Thou, Bel, and there is no guile with Thee.” This which
Scripture now says: “He cried with a loud voice,” because it is spoken of an idolater and one ignorant of God, seems to overturn the observation we have long maintained, that the term “great voice” is found among the holy A alone. But if anyone can prove that it belongs to the canon, then it must be sought what we ought to answer him.
41 FROM THE TENTH BOOK OF ORIGEN’S STROMATA (31)
On these words of the Epistle to the Galatians, ch. v, v. 13: *For you have been called to liberty, brethren; only do not give liberty for an occasion to the flesh.*
The passage is difficult, and thus it seems to us to require explanation. He who is free, and follows the spirit and truth in a deeper sense, despises the preceding types and the letter: yet he ought not on that account to despise those who are weaker B or give an occasion for utter despair to those who cannot perceive the sublime. For even if they be weak and be called flesh in comparison with the spirit, nevertheless they are Christ’s flesh. For if he understands the mystery of charity serving the weaker, let him do something for the sake of the weak: lest through his lack of knowledge the brother should perish, for whom Christ died.
Diligently observe, therefore, whether this meaning is woven together from what follows. “You,” he says, “brethren, have been called to liberty;” perhaps because not all were able to grasp the calling of liberty. On account of which you now hear: “Only do not give liberty for an occasion to the flesh.” For by love it is fitting that the greater should serve the lesser; because he who wishes to be greater, shall be servant of all. C Therefore, let not the spiritual man lacerate the flesh of Christ, nor give them an occasion so that they bite one another, lest they be consumed by one another. It behooves one, therefore, walking in the spirit, and following the words of the Scriptures in spirit, not to perform the desire of their flesh.
But if we understand what is said: “Walk in the spirit, and you shall not fulfill the desire of the flesh,” simply, as most suppose, contrary to the argument and hypothesis of the entire Epistle, Paul will suddenly burst forth into this; for he immediately follows: “But if you are led by the spirit, you are not under the law.” And although the discourse hitherto coheres with itself in some measure, yet if we again follow the simple understanding, he suddenly transfers us to disorderly precepts, discussing flesh and spirit, that is: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, this and that.” And on the contrary: “But the fruit of the spirit is charity,” and the rest. D But we ought not to despair of coherence in these things either: because the history of the divine volumes contains the works of the flesh; not much helping those who understand it in such a way as it is written. For who will not be taught to serve luxury and to hold fornication as nothing, when he reads of Judas going into a harlot and the patriarchs having many wives at once? How will he not be called to idolatry, who thinks that the blood of bulls and the other Levitical victims indicate nothing more than what sounds in the letter?
Moreover, that the discourse of Scripture, when set in the open, teaches enmities is proved also from this passage: “O daughter of Babylon, miserable; blessed is he who shall repay thee the retribution which thou hast repaid us. Blessed is he who shall hold and dash thy little ones against the rock”; from that: “In the morning I slew all the sinners of the land,” and other things like these: namely, concerning contentions, emulation, anger, strifes, dissensions. To which, if we do not perceive something higher, the examples of history provoke us more than they deter us. Heresies also have subsisted more from a carnal understanding of Scripture than from the work of our flesh, as most estimate. Moreover, we learn envy and drunkenness through the letter of the law. Noah is drunk after the flood; and the patriarchs are in Egypt at their brother Joseph’s. But banquets also are written of in the book of Kings; with David dancing and clashing cymbals before the ark of the testament of God; and similar things.
It is asked how the simple discourse of divine Scripture, which is called flesh, provokes us to witchcrafts and magical arts, unless we transcend to the spirit of that same Scripture. I think this is what is signified by Daniel and the three youths being found wiser than the enchanters and the Gazarenes and the Chaldeans, and Moses being learned in all the wisdom and doctrine of the Egyptians. Therefore, it is an occasion of many evils if anyone persists in the flesh of Scripture. Those who do these things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Wherefore let us seek the spirit of Scripture and its fruits, which are not said to be manifest. For with much labor and sweat, and worthy cultivation, the fruit of the spirit is found in the Scriptures. Whence I think that Paul spoke diligently and cautiously to the carnal concerning the senses of Scripture: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest”; but concerning the spiritual, he did not put it as he did there, “the fruit of the spirit is manifest,” but thus: “But the fruit of the spirit is charity, joy, peace,” and the rest. For if, leaving the types, we pass to the truth of Scripture and the spirit, immediately the first charity is opened to us; and stepping from there to joy, we arrive at peace, through which we obtain patience.