THE FATHERS

OF THE CHURCH
A N E W T R A N SL AT ION

VOLU M E 14 6
 THE FATHERS OF
THE CHURCH
A N E W T R A N SL AT ION

EDI TOR I A L BOA R D

David G. Hunter
Boston College
Editorial Director

Paul M. Blowers William E. Klingshirn

Emmanuel Christian Seminary The Catholic University of America

Aaron Butts Joseph T. Lienhard, S.J.

The Catholic University of America Fordham University

Andrew Cain Rebecca Lyman

University of Colorado Church Divinity School of the Pacific

Mark DelCogliano Wendy Mayer

University of St. Thomas Australian Lutheran College

Robert A. Kitchen
Regina, Saskatchewan

Trevor Lipscombe
Director, The Catholic University of America Press

F OR M ER EDI T OR I A L DI R EC T OR S
Ludwig Schopp, Roy J. Deferrari, Bernard M. Peebles,
Hermigild Dressler, O.F.M., Thomas P. Halton

Carole Monica C. Burnett, Staff Editor

 ORIGEN
HOMILIES ON PSALMS
36–38

Translated by

MICH A EL HEIN TZ

THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA PRESS

Washington, D.C.
 Copyright © 2023
THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA PRESS
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum

requirements of the American National Standards for
Information Science--Permanence of Paper for Printed
Library Materials, ANSI z39.48 - 1984.
∞

Cataloging-in-Publication data is available

from the Library of Congress.
ISBN ­978-0-8132-3649-0
Contents

C ON T E N T S

Acknowledgments vii
Abbreviations ix
Select Bibliography xi

INTRODUCTION
Introduction 3
The Nine Homilies on Psalms 36–38 3
Dating the Homilies on the Psalms 6
Psalmody in Early Christian Life 8
The Translation of Rufinus 13
The Assessment of Erasmus 18
The Preface of Rufinus 21
Origen on Scripture and Anthropology 25
The Moral Sense in Practice 32
Origen’s Teaching in the Homilies on the Psalms 35
The Agonistic / Military Model 36
The Medicinal / Therapeutic Model 47
The Educational / Pedagogical Model 52
Future Judgment 59
The Epinoiai of Christ 62
Conclusion 68
A Note on the Translation 70

HOMILIES ON PSALMS 36–38

The Preface of Rufinus 75
First Homily on Psalm 36 [37] 76
Second Homily on Psalm 36 [37] 94
Third Homily on Psalm 36 [37] 108
Fourth Homily on Psalm 36 [37] 133
vi Contents

Fifth Homily on Psalm 36 [37] 154

First Homily on Psalm 37 [38] 171
Second Homily on Psalm 37 [38] 190
First Homily on Psalm 38 [39] 203
Second Homily on Psalm 38 [39] 221

INDICES
General Index 239
Index of Holy Scripture 245
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

AC K NOW L E D G M E N T S

In the design of divine Providence I was privileged to com-

plete work on the final proofs of this volume while on retreat
at Tabgha on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee, in the
land where Origen spent the second half of his life and min-
istry, and where, a century later, Rufinus for a time lived the
monastic life.
This translation began years ago in a doctoral seminar at
the University of Notre Dame taught by the late Rowan Greer
in his capacity as visiting professor. It was at his prompting
and encouragement that I began work on Origen’s Homilies
on the Psalms in Rufinus’s translation. I am no less grateful
to those seminary professors who first introduced me to the
study of the Fathers, in particular Fathers John Farrell, Wil-
liam Palardy, and Laurence McGrath.
I wish to thank my former student and now learned friend,
Andrew Chronister, who at an early stage in the production of
this volume was of enormous technical assistance, as well as my
current students Sean O’Connor and Tomás Villacis, for their
generous work in compiling the indices.
I am also deeply indebted to Carole Burnett of the Catholic
University of America Press: her sharp eye and sound editorial
judgment are equaled only by her generosity and graciousness.
Working with her has been a great joy.
Finally, but first in the order of importance, I am most
grateful to those who guided my studies at the University of
Notre Dame, especially John Cavadini, Brian Daley, Robin
Darling Young, Joseph Wawrykow, and Daniel Sheerin. These
were my teachers who in various ways had a profound impact
on the shape of my mind, and whom I was also soon bless-

vii
viii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

ed to join as a colleague in the Theology Department. I am

abidingly grateful for their many kindnesses, not least their
witness of scholarship at the service of the Church: Οὐκ ἔστιν
μαθητὴς ὑπὲρ τὸν διδάσκαλον...ἀρκετὸν τῷ μαθητῇ ἵνα γένηται ὡς ὁ
διδάσκαλος αὐτοῦ (Matthew 10.24–25).
ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATIONS

A BBR E V I AT ION S

General Abbreviations
CCL Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina
[Turnhout, 1954– ]
CPG Clavis Patrum Graecorum [ed. M. Geerard,
1974–87]
CPL Clavis Patrum Latinorum [ed. E. Dekkers, 1995]
CSEL Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum
[Vienna, 1866– ]
GCS Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller
der ersten drei Jahrhunderte [Leipzig and Berlin,
1897– ]
Origenes vier Bücher von den Prinzipien
GK 
[ed. H. Görgemanns and H. Karpp, 1992]
Lewis and Short A Latin Dictionary [ed. C. Lewis, 1879]
LXX Septuagint
OLD 
Oxford Latin Dictionary [ed. P. G. W. Glare, 1982]
PG J.-P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus,
Series Graeca [Paris, 1857–1866]
PL J.-P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus,
Series Latina [Paris, 1844–1864]
SC Sources Chrétiennes [Paris, 1942– ]
Souter Glossary of Later Latin [ed. A. Souter, 1949]
TLL Thesaurus Linguae Latinae [Leipzig, 1900– ]
VL Vetus Latina / Old Latin version of the Scriptures
Vlg Vulgate

ix
x ABBREVIATIONS

Abbreviations of Origen’s Works

Comm in Cant Commentary on the Canticle of Canticles
Comm in Jn Commentary on the Gospel of John
Comm in Rom Commentary on the Letter to the Romans
Dial Heracl Dialogue with Heraclides
Ex ad Mart Exhortation to Martyrdom
Hom in Cant Homilies on the Canticle of Canticles
Hom in Ex Homilies on the Book of Exodus
Hom in Ez Homilies on the Prophet Ezekiel
Hom in Gen Homilies on the Book of Genesis
Hom in Jer Homilies on the Prophet Jeremiah
Hom in Jos Homilies on Joshua
Hom in Jud Homilies on the Book of Judges
Hom in Lev Homilies on the Book of Leviticus
Hom in Luc Homilies on the Gospel of Luke
Hom in Num Homilies on the Book of Numbers
Hom in Ps Homilies on the Psalms
Hom in Sam Homilies on the Books of Samuel
BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

S E L EC T BI B L IOG R A PH Y

Text
Origene, Omelie sui Salmi. Biblioteca Patristica 18. Edited by Emanuela Prinzi-
valli. Florence: Nardini Editore, 1991.
Origène, Homélies sur les Psaumes 36 à 38. Sources Chrétiennes 411. Edited by
Emanuela Prinzivalli. With introduction, French translation, and notes
by Henri Crouzel and Luc Brésard. Paris: Cerf, 1995.

Studies
Adler, William. “Ad verbum or ad sensum: The Christianization of a Latin
Translation Formula in the Fourth Century.” An unpublished paper pre-
sented at the meeting of the American Society of Church History, Wil-
liamsburg, VA, April 1, 1993.
Bader, Günther. Psalterium affectuum palaestra: Prolegomena zu einer Theologie
des Psalters. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1996.
Barnes, Timothy D. Constantine and Eusebius. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni-
versity Press, 1981.
Behr, John. Origen: On First Principles. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.
———. The Way to Nicaea. Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press,
2001.
Benjamins, Hendrik S. Eingeordnete Freiheit: Freiheit und Vorsehung bei Origenes.
Leiden: Brill, 1994.
Blaise, Albert. A Handbook of Christian Latin: Style, Morphology, and Syntax.
Translated by Grant C. Roti. Washington, DC: Georgetown University
Press, 1994.
Blosser, Benjamin. Become Like the Angels: Origen’s Doctrine of the Soul. Wash-
ington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2012.
Borkowski, Andrew, and Paul Du Plessis. Textbook on Roman Law. 3rd ed.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Bostock, David G. “Medical Theory and Theology in Origen.” In Origeni-
ana Tertia, edited by R. P. C. Hanson and Henri Crouzel, 191–99. Rome:
Edizioni dell’Ateneo, 1985.
Bradshaw, Paul, Maxwell Johnson, and Edward Phillips. The Apostolic Tradi-
tion. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2002.

xi
xii BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brent, Allen. A Political History of Early Christianity. London: T&T Clark,

2009.
Burton, Philip. The Old Latin Gospels: A Study of their Texts and Language. Ox-
ford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Butterworth, G. W., trans. and ed. Origen: On First Principles. Gloucester, UK:
Peter Smith, 1973.
Cadiou, René. Commentaires inédits des Psaumes: Étude sur les textes d’Origène
contenus dans le manuscrit Vindobonensis 8. Paris: Société d’édition Les
Belles Lettres, 1936.
Caloz, Masséo. Étude sur la LXX origénienne du Psautier: Les relations entre les
leçons des Psaumes du Manuscrit Coislin 44, les Fragments des Hexaples et le
texte du Psautier Gallican. Fribourg: Éditions universitaires, 1978.
Carriker, Andrew. The Library of Eusebius of Caesarea. Leiden: Brill, 2003.
Cavadini, John. “From Letter to Spirit: The Multiple Senses of Scripture.” In
The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Biblical Interpretation, edited by Paul
M. Blowers and Peter W. Martens, 126–48. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2019.
Cerrato, J. A. Hippolytus Between East and West: The Commentaries and the Prove-
nance of the Corpus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Chadwick, Henry. Origen: Contra Celsum. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1953.
———. The Sentences of Sextus: A Contribution to the History of Early Christian
Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959.
Chiesa, Paolo. “Ad verbum o ad sensum? Modelli e coscienza metodologica
della traduzione tra tarda antichità e alto medioevo.” Medioevo e Rinasci-
mento 1 (1987): 1–51.
Clark, Elizabeth A. The Origenist Controversy: The Cultural Construction of an
Early Christian Debate. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992.
Consolino, Franca Ela. “Le prefazioni di Girolamo e Rufino alle loro traduz-
ioni di Origene.” In Origeniana Quinta, edited by Robert J. Daly, 92–98.
Leuven: Peeters, Leuven University Press, 1992.
Coppa, Giovanni. Settantaquattro omelie du libro dei Salmi. Turin: Pauline,
1993.
Crouzel, Henri. Origen. Translated by A. S. Worrall. San Francisco: Harper
and Row, 1989.
———. Origène et la connaissance mystique. Bruges: Desclée de Brouwer, 1961.
———. Origène et la philosophie. Paris: Aubier, 1962.
———. “Quand le Fils transmet le Royaume à son Père: L’interprétation
d’Origène.” Studia Missionalia 33 (1984): 359–84.
———. Théologie de l’image de Dieu chez Origène. Paris: Aubier, 1956.
Dal Covolo, Enrico. “Note sulla dottrina origeniana della morte.” In Orige-
niana Quinta, edited by Robert J. Daly, 430–37. Leuven: Peeters, Leuven
University Press, 1992.
Daley, Brian. “Is Patristic Exegesis Still Usable? Reflections on Early Chris-
tian Interpretation of the Psalms.” Communio 29 (2002): 185–216.
———. “Origen’s De Principiis: A Guide to the Principles of Christian Scrip-
 BIBLIOGRAPHY xiii

tural Interpretation.” In Vetera et Nova: Patristic Studies in Honor of Thomas

Patrick Halton, edited by John Petruccione, 3–21. Washington, DC: The
Catholic University of America Press, 1998.
Daniélou, Jean. The Angels and their Mission according to the Fathers of the
Church. Translated by David Heimann. Westminster, MD: The Newman
Press, 1957. Reprinted, Allen, TX: Christian Classics, 1987.
———. The Bible and the Liturgy. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame
Press, 1966.
———. From Shadows to Reality: Studies in the Biblical Typology of the Fathers.
Translated by Wulstan Hibberd. London: Burns and Oates, 1960.
———. Gospel Message and Hellenistic Culture. Translated by John Austin Bak-
er. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1973.
———. Origen. Translated by Walter Mitchell. New York: Sheed and Ward,
1955.
Dawson, David. “Allegorical Reading and the Embodiment of the Soul in
Origen.” In Christian Origins: Theology, Rhetoric, and Community, edited by
Lewis Ayres and Gareth Jones, 26–43. London: Routledge, 1998.
———. Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity. Berkeley: Uni-
versity of California Press, 2002.
de Lange, Nicholas. Origen and the Jews: Studies in ­Jewish-Christian Relations in
­Third-century Palestine. University of Cambridge Oriental Publications 25.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976.
de Lubac, Henri. History and Spirit: The Understanding of Scripture According to
Origen. Translated by Anne Englund Nash. San Francisco: Ignatius, 2007.
———. “Tripartite Anthropology.” In de Lubac, Theology in History, translat-
ed by Anne Englund Nash, 117–200. San Francisco: Ignatius, 1996.
Devreesse, Robert. Les anciens commentateurs grecs de Psaumes [Studi et Testi
264]. Rome: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1970.
Dihle, Albrecht. The Theory of Will in Classical Antiquity. Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1982.
Dively Lauro, Elizabeth Ann. The Soul and the Spirit of Scripture within Origen’s
Exegesis. Boston: Brill, 2005.
Dorival, Gilles. “Aperçu sur l’histoire des chaînes exégétiques grecques sur
le psautier (V–XIV siècles).” Studia Patristica 15 (1984): 146–69.
———. Les chaînes exégétiques grecques sur les Psaumes: Contribution à l’étude
d’une forme littéraire. 4 vols. Leuven: Peeters, 1986.
———. Le Psautier chez les Pères. Strasbourg: Centre d’analyse et de documen-
tation patristiques, 1994.
Drewery, Benjamin. Origen and the Doctrine of Grace. London: Epworth Press,
1960.
Edwards, Mark J. “Christ or Plato?” In Christian Origins: Theology, Rhetoric,
and Community, edited by Lewis Ayres and Gareth Jones, 11–25. London:
Routledge, 1998.
———. Origen against Plato. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002.
Fischer, Balthasar. Die Psalmen als Stimme der Kirche: Gesammelte Studien zur
christlichen Psalmenfrömmigkeit. Trier: Paulinus, 1982.
xiv BIBLIOGRAPHY

Flynn, William. “Liturgical Music.” In The Oxford History of Christian Worship,

edited by Geoffrey Wainwright and Karen Westerfield Tucker, 769–92.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Frede, Michael. A Free Will: Origins of the Notion in Ancient Thought. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2011.
———. “Origen’s Treatise Against Celsus.” In Apologetics in the Roman Empire:
Pagans, Jews, and Christians, edited by Mark Edwards, Martin Goodman,
and Simon Price, in association with Christopher Rowland, 131–55. Ox-
ford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Godin, André. Érasme lecteur d’Origène. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1982.
Gögler, Rolf. “Inkarnationsglaube und Bibeltheologie bei Origenes.” Theol-
ogische Quartalschrift 165 (1985): 82–94.
Grafton, Anthony, and Megan Williams. Christianity and the Transformation
of the Book: Origen, Eusebius, and the Library of Caesarea. Cambridge, MA:
Belknap, 2006.
Grant, Robert. “More Fragments of Origen?” Vigiliae Christianae 2 (1948):
243–47.
Grappone, Antonio. “Annotazioni sulla cronologia delle Omelie di Ori-
gene.” Augustinianum 41 (2001): 27–58.
———. Omelie origeniane nella traduzione di Rufino. Un confronto con i testi greci.
Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 2007.
Hadot, Ilsetraut. Arts libéraux et philosophie dans la pensée antique. Paris: Études
Augustiniennes, 1984.
Hadot, Pierre. What is Ancient Philosophy? Translated by Michael Chase. Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002.
Hale Williams, Megan. The Monk and the Book: Jerome and the Making of Chris-
tian Scholarship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006.
Hällström, Gunnar af. Fides Simpliciorum according to Origen of Alexandria.
Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 1984.
Hammond Bammel, Caroline. “The Last Ten Years of Rufinus’ Life and the
Date of his Move South to Aquileia.” Journal of Theological Studies n.s. 28
(1977): 372–429.
———. Der Römerbriefkommentar des Origenes: Kritische Ausgabe der Übersetzung
Rufins, Buch 1–3. Freiburg: Herder, 1990.
Hanson, R. P. C. Allegory and Event: A Study of the Sources and Significance of Ori-
gen’s Interpretation of Scripture. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2002.
Harl, Marguerite. Origène et la fonction révélatrice du Verbe incarné. Paris: Édi-
tions du Seuil, 1958.
Harnack, Adolf. Geschichte der altchristlichen Litteratur bis Eusebius. 4 vols.
Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1958.
Heine, Ronald. The Commentary of Origen on the Gospel of St. Matthew. 2 vols.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.
———. “Epinoiai.” In The Westminster Handbook to Origen, edited by John A.
McGuckin, 93–95. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2004.
———. Gregory of Nyssa’s Treatise on the Inscriptions of the Psalms. Oxford: Clar-
endon, 1995.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY xv

———, trans. Origen. Homilies on Genesis and Exodus. Fathers of the Church
71. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1982.
———. “Origen on the Christological Significance of Psalm 45 (44).” Con-
sensus 23 (1997): 21–37.
———. Origen: Scholarship in the Service of the Church. New York: Oxford Uni-
versity Press, 2011.
Hennessey, Lawrence. “Origen of Alexandria: The Fate of the Soul and
Body After Death.” Second Century 8 (1991): 163–78.
———. “A Philosophical Issue in Origen’s Eschatology: The Three Senses of
Incorporeality.” In Origeniana Quinta, edited by Robert J. Daly, 373–80.
Leuven: Peeters, Leuven University Press, 1992.
Hurtado, Larry. The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Ori-
gins. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006.
James, Mark Randall. Learning the Language of Scripture: Origen, Wisdom, and
the Logic of Interpretation. Leiden: Brill, 2021.
Janson, Tore. Latin Prose Prefaces: Studies in Literary Conventions. Stockholm:
Almqvist and Wiksell, 1964.
Jülicher, Adolf. Itala: Das Neue Testament in altlateinischer Überlieferung. 4 vols.
Berlin: De Gruyter, 1954.
Kelly, J. N. D. Jerome: His Life, Writings, and Controversies. Peabody, MA: Hen-
drickson, 1998.
King, J. Christopher. Origen on the Song of Songs as the Spirit of Scripture: The
Bridegroom’s Perfect Marriage Song. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Klosterman, Erich, and Ernst Benz. Origenes Matthäuserklärung II: Die
lateinische Übersetzung der Commentariorum Series [= Die griechischen christli-
chen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte 44: Origenes Werke XI]. Revised
edition by Ursula Treu. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1976.
Kolbet, Paul. “Athanasius, the Psalms, and the Reformation of the Self.” Har-
vard Theological Review 99 (2006): 85–101.
Latko, Ernest. Origen’s Concept of Penance. Quebec: Laval, 1949.
Le Boulluec, Alain. “La polémique contre les hérésies dans les Homélies sur
les Psaumes d’Origène.” Adamantius 20 (2014): 256–74.
Leclercq, Jean. The Love of Learning and the Desire for God: A Study of Monastic
Culture. Translated by Catharine Misrahi. New York: Fordham University
Press, 1961.
———. “Nouveaux témoins sur Origène au XIIe siècle.” Medieval Studies 15
(1953): 104–6.
———. “Origène au XIIe siècle.” Irénikon 24 (1951): 425–39.
Lewy, Hans. Sobria Ebrietas: Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der antiken Mystik.
Giessen: Verlag von Alfred Töpelmann, 1929.
Louth, Andrew. The Origins of the Christian Mystical Tradition: Plato to Denys.
Oxford: Clarendon, 1981.
Marcovich, Miroslav. Iustini Martyris Dialogus cum Tryphone. Berlin: De Gruy-
ter, 1997.
Martens, Peter W. Origen and Scripture: The Contours of the Exegetical Life. New
York: Oxford University Press, 2014.
xvi BIBLIOGRAPHY

Marti, Heinrich. Übersetzer der ­Augustin-Zeit. Munich: ­W ilhelm-Fink, 1974.

Matter, E. Ann. The Voice of My Beloved: The Song of Songs in Western Medieval
Christianity. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990.
Maur, H. J. auf der. Das Psalmenverständnis des Ambrosius von Mailand: Ein
Beitrag zum Deutungshintergrund der Psalmenverwendung im Gottesdienst der
Alten Kirche. Leiden: Brill, 1977.
McGuckin, John Anthony. “Caesarea Maritima as Origen Knew It.” In Ori-
geniana Quinta, edited by Robert J. Daly, 3–25. Leuven: Peeters, Leuven
University Press, 1992.
———. “Origen’s Use of the Psalms in the Treatise On First Principles.” In
Meditations of the Heart: The Psalms in Early Christian Thought and Practice.
Essays in Honour of Andrew Louth, edited by A. Andreopoulos, A. Casiday,
and C. Harrison, 97–118. Turnhout: Brepols, 2011.
McKinnon, James. Music in Early Christian Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1986.
Merlo, Francesca, and J. Gribomont. Il Salterio di Rufino. Vatican City: Libre-
ria Vaticana, 1972.
Metzger, Bruce. The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and
Significance. Oxford: Clarendon, 1987.
Miranda, Americo. “La nozione di ‘corpo spirituale’ in Origene e nella tra-
dizione antiochena.” Gregorianum 84 (2003): 295–314.
Mitchell, Margaret. “‘Problems and Solutions’ in Early Christian Biblical
Interpretation: A Telling Case from Origen’s ­Newly-Discovered Greek
Homilies on the Psalms (Codex Monacensis Graecus 314).” In Adamantius
22 (2016): 40–55.
Mohrmann, Christine. “Praedicare–Tractare–Sermo.” ­Maison-Dieu 39 (1954):
97–107.
Monaci Castagno, Adele. “Contesto liturgico e cronologia della predicazi-
one origeniana alla luce della nuove Omelie sui Salmi.” In Adamantius 20
(2014): 238–55.
———. Origene predicatore e il suo pubblico. Turin: Franco Angeli, 1987.
———. “Origen the Scholar and Pastor.” In Preacher and Audience: Studies in
Early Christian and Byzantine Homiletics, edited by Mary B. Cunningham
and Pauline Allen, 65–87. Leiden: Brill, 1998.
Morgan, Teresa. Literate Education in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Mühlenberg, Ekkehard. Psalmenkommentare aus der Katenenüberlieferung. 3
vols. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1975–1978.
———. “Zur Überlieferung des Psalmenkommentars von Origenes.” In Tex-
te und Textkritik, edited by Jürgen Dummer, 441–51. Berlin: Akademie
Verlag, 1987.
Murphy, Francis X. Rufinus of Aquileia (345–411): His Life and Works. Washing-
ton, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1945.
Nautin, Pierre. Le Dossier d’Hippolyte et de Méliton. Paris: Cerf, 1953.
———. “L’homélie d’Hippolyte sur le psautier et les oeuvres de Josipe.” Re-
vue de l’histoire des religions 179.2 (1971): 137–79.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY xvii

———. Origène: Sa vie et son oeuvre. Paris: Beauchesne, 1977.

Neuschäfer, Bernhard. Origenes als Philologe. 2 vols. Basel: Friedrich Rein-
hardt, 1987.
Noce, Carla. Vestis Varia: L’imagine della veste nell’opera di Origene. Rome: Au-
gustinianum, 2003.
Notley, R. Steven, and Zev Safrai. Eusebius, Onomasticon: The Place Names
of Divine Scripture, including the Latin edition of Jerome. Boston: Brill, 2005.
Nussbaum, Martha C. The Therapy of Desire: Theory and Practice in Hellenistic
Ethics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994.
O’Cleirig, P. “Topoi of Invention in Origen’s Homilies.” In Origeniana Sexta,
edited by Gilles Dorival and Alain Le Boulluec, 277–87. Leuven: Peeters,
Leuven University Press, 1995.
Olivar, Alejandro. La predicación cristiana antigua. Barcelona: Herder, 1991.
Opelt, Ilona. “Origene visto da san Girolamo.” Augustinianum 26 (1985):
217–22.
Pace, Nicolà. Ricerche sulla Traduzione di Rufino del De principiis di Origene.
Florence: La Nuova Italia Editrice, 1990.
Peri, Vittorio. Omelie origeniane sui Salmi: Contributo all’identificazione della testo
latino. Rome: Vatican, 1980.
Perrone, Lorenzo. “Discovering Origen’s Lost Homilies on the Psalms.” Auctores
Nostri 15 (2015): 19–46.
———. “‘I cuori e I reni’: Note sull’interpretazione origeniana de Sal 7,10.”
Adamantius 22 (2016): 87–104.
———. Il cuore indurito del Faraone: Origene e il problema del libero arbitrio. Ge-
noa: Marietti, 1992.
———. “The Dating of the New Homilies on the Psalms in the Munich Co-
dex: The Ultimate Origen?” ­Proche-Orient Chrétien 67 (2017): 243–51.
———. “Origenes alt und neu: Die Psalmenhomilien in der neuentdeck-
ten Münchner Handschrift.” Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum 17 (2013):
193–214.
———. “Origenes redivivus: La découverte des Homélies sur les Psaumes dans le
Cod. Gr. 314 de Munich.” Revue des études augustiniennes et patristiques 59
(2013): 55–93.
Perrone, Lorenzo, with Marina Molin Pradel, Emanuela Prinzivalli, and An-
tonio Cacciari. Die neuen Psalmenhomilien: Eine kritische Edition des Codex
Monacensis Graecus 314. GCS n.f. 19, Origenes XIII. Berlin: DeGruyter,
2015.
Pitra, Jean Baptiste. Analecta Sacra spicilegio Solesmensi parata. 8 vols. Farnbor-
ough, UK: Gregg, 1966.
Pizzolato, Luigi, and Marco Rizzi, eds. Origene: Maestro de vita spirituale. Mi-
lan: Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 2001.
Poschmann, Bernhard. Penance and the Anointing of the Sick. Translated by
Francis Courtney. New York: Herder and Herder, 1964.
Preuschen, Erwin. Palladius und Rufinus: Ein Beitrag zur Quellenkunde des
ältesten Mönchtums: Texte und Untersuchungen. Giessen: J. Rickersche, 1897.
Prinzivalli, Emanuela. “La tradizione manoscritta e le edizioni della Omelie
xviii BIBLIOGRAPHY

sui Salmi di Origene tradotte da Rufino.” Vetera Christianorum 31 (1994):

155–69.
Rahner, Karl. Theological Investigations XV: Penance in the Early Church. Trans-
lated by Lionel Swain. New York: Crossroad, 1982.
Rondeau, ­Marie-Josèphe. Les commentaires patristiques du Psautier (IIIe–Ve siè-
cle). 2 vols. Rome: Institutum Studiorum Orientalium, 1982–1985.
———. “L’Élucidation des interlocuteurs des Psaumes et le développement
dogmatique (III/e–V/e siècle).” In Liturgie und Dichtung, edited by Hans-
jakob Becker and Reiner Kaczynski, 509–77. Sankt Ottilien: EOS Verlag,
1983.
———. “Les polémiques d’Hippolyte et de Filastre de Brescia concernant le
psautier.” Revue de l’histoire des religions 171 (1967): 1–51.
Russell, Norman. The Doctrine of Divinization in Greek Patristic Thought. Ox-
ford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Scheck, Thomas. “Law.” In The Westminster Handbook to Origen, edited by John
A. McGuckin, 138–40. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2004.
Schenker, Adrian. Psalmen in den Hexapla: Erste kritische und vollständige Aus-
gabe der hexaplarischen Fragmente auf dem Rande der Handschriften Ottobo-
nianus graecus 398 zu den Ps 24–32. Vatican City: Biblioteca apostolica
vaticana, 1982.
Sheerin, Daniel. “Rhetorical and Hermeneutic Synkrisis in Patristic Typol-
ogy.” In Vetera et Nova: Patristic Studies in Honor of Thomas Patrick Halton,
edited by John Petruccione, 22–39. Washington, DC: The Catholic Uni-
versity of America Press, 1998.
———. “The Role of Prayer in Origen’s Homilies.” In Origen of Alexandria:
His World and His Legacy, edited by Charles Kannengiesser and William
L. Petersen, 200–214. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press,
1988.
Silvas, Anna. “Rufinus’ Translation Techniques in the Regula Basili.” Antich-
thon 37 (2003): 71–93.
Simonetti, Manlio. “Leggendo le Omelie sui Salmi di Origene.” Adamantius
22 (2016): 454–80.
———. Origene esegeta e la sua tradizione. Brescia: Morcelliana, 2004.
Sinkiewicz, Robert. Evagrius of Pontus: The Greek Ascetic Corpus. Oxford: Ox-
ford University Press, 2003.
­Stewart-Sykes, Alistair. Hippolytus: On the Apostolic Tradition. Crestwood, NY:
St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001.
Stough, Charlotte. “Stoic Determinism and Moral Responsibility.” In The
Stoics, edited by John M. Rist, 203–30. Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1978.
Thomas, Matthew. “Origen on Paul’s Authorship of Hebrews.” In New Testa-
ment Studies 65 (2019): 598–609.
Torjesen, Karen Jo. “‘Body,’ ‘Soul,’ and ‘Spirit’ in Origen’s Theory of Exege-
sis.” Anglican Theological Review 67 (1985): 17–30.
———. Hermeneutical Procedure and Theological Method in Origen’s Exegesis. Ber-
lin: De Gruyter, 1986.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY xix

———. “Influence of Rhetoric on Origen’s Old Testament Homilies.” In

Origeniana Sexta, edited by Gilles Dorival and Alain Le Boulluec, 13–26.
Leuven: Peeters, Leuven University Press, 1995.
———. “Origen’s Interpretation of the Psalms.” Studia Patristica 17 (1982):
944–58.
Trigg, Joseph W. Origen. New York and London: Routledge, 1998.
———. “Origen and Origenism in the 1990s.” Religious Studies Review 22
(1996): 301–8.
———, trans. Origen. Homilies on the Psalms: Codex Monacensis Graecus 314.
Fathers of the Church 141. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of
America Press, 2020.
Vessey, Mark. “Jerome and Rufinus.” In The Cambridge History of Early Chris-
tian Literature, edited by Frances Young, Lewis Ayres, and Andrew Louth,
318–27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Viciano, Alberto, “Homeron ex Homerou Saphenizein: Principios Hermenéuti­
cos de Teodoreto de Ciro en su Comentario a las Epístolas Paulinas.”
Scripta Theologica 21 (1989): 13–61.
Wagner, M. Monica. Rufinus the Translator: A Study of his Theory and his Practice
as Illustrated in his Version of the Apologetica of St. Gregory Nazianzen. Wash-
ington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1945.
Williams, A. N. The Divine Sense: The Intellect in Patristic Theology. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Williams, Rowan. Arius: Heresy and Tradition. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
2002.
———. “Origen: Between Orthodoxy and Heresy.” In Origeniana Septima, ed-
ited by Wolfgang A. Bienert and Uwe Kühneweg, 3–14. Leuven: Peeters,
Leuven University Press, 1999.
Winkelmann, Friedhelm. “Einige Bemerkungen zu den Aussagen des
Rufinus von Aquileia und des Hieronymus über ihre Übersetzungstheo-
rie und -Methode.” In Kyriakon: Festschrift Johannes Quasten. 2 vols. Edited
by Patrick Granfield and Josef Jungmann. Munster/Westfalia: Aschen-
dorff, 1970.
Wolinski, Joseph. “Le recours aux epinoiai du Christ dans le Commentaire
sur Jean d’Origène.” In Origeniana Sexta, edited by Gilles Dorival and
Alain Le Boulluec, 465–92. Leuven: Peeters, Leuven University Press,
1995.
Young, Frances. Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
I NTRODUCT ION
Introduction
Introduction

I N T RODUC T ION

The Nine Homilies on Psalms 36–38

There are extant, in the Latin translation of Rufinus of
Aquileia,1 nine homilies on Psalms 36–38 by Origen:2 five on
Psalm 36,3 two on Psalm 37, and two on Psalm 38. There are
also some 58 Greek fragments culled from later catenae; most
of these, however, are no more than a few lines in length. In
1991, Emanuela Prinzivalli published the first critical edition
of these homilies (including the Greek fragments) in the series
Biblioteca Patristica,4 which renders obsolete the earlier edition

1. CPG 1428.
2. This is their numbering in the LXX and Vulgate; they are numbered as
Psalms 37–39 in the Hebrew psalter.
3. In 2012, a remarkable discovery was made. While cataloguing manu-
scripts, Marina Pradel discovered in an early t­welfth-century manuscript from
the collection of the Staatsbibliothek in Munich (Codex Monacensis Graecus 314),
a cache of t­ wenty-nine homilies of Origen preserved in Greek; among the new-
ly discovered homilies are the first four homilies on Psalm 36, translated here
from the Latin of Rufinus. On the discovery, see Lorenzo Perrone, “Origenes alt
und neu: Die Psalmenhomilien in der neuentdeckten Münchner Handschrift,”
in Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum 17 (2013): 193–214; “Origenes redivivus: La
découverte des Homélies sur les Psaumes dans le Cod. Gr. 314 de Munich,” in
Revue des études augustiniennes et patristiques 59 (2013): 55–93; “Dis­covering Ori-
gen’s Lost Homilies on the Psalms,” in Auctores Nostri 15 (2015):19–46; and for
the critical edition of the ­twenty-nine homilies, see Lorenzo Perrone, Marina
Molin Pradel, Emanuela Prinzivalli, and Antonio Cacciari, Die neuen Psalmenhom-
ilien: Eine kritische Edition des Codex Monacensis Graecus 314 (Berlin: DeGruyter,
2015) [GCS n.f. 19, Origenes XIII]; for the critical edition, Emanuela Prinzivalli
edited the four homilies on Psalm 36. For the English translation and an excel-
lent introduction, see Joseph W. Trigg, Homilies on the Psalms: Codex Monacensis
Graecus 314, Fathers of the Church 141 (Washington, DC: The Catholic Univer-
sity of America Press, 2020).
4. Origene, Omelie sui Salmi, ed. and trans. Emanuela Prinzivalli, Biblioteca
Patristica 18 (Florence: Nardini Editore, 1991).

3
4 Introduction

of Charles Delarue (Paris, 1733), reprinted by J.-P. Migne in

his Patrologia Graeca 12, and which itself was used as the tex-
tus receptus for her critical edition. 5 This was followed in 1995
by a reprint of her edition (without apparatus criticus) in the
series Sources Chrétiennes.6 This is no mean contribution; for
while the editors of Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller
have produced critical editions of almost all of Origen’s major
works, neither his Commentary on Romans 7 nor his Homilies on
Psalms 36–38 had appeared in that corpus; thus the edition of
these homilies commonly available to scholars was that found
in Migne, PG 12. Finally, while the 1991 edition of Prinzivalli
is accompanied by an Italian translation, and the 1995 Sources
Chrétiennes edition includes the French translation of Henri
Crouzel and Luc Brésard, until now there has been no English
translation of these homilies.
According to Jerome,8 Origen’s works devoted to the Scrip-
tures can be classified in three categories: τόμοι (volumina),
σχόλια (excerpta), and ὁμίλιαι (homiliae, tractatus).9 The lengthy
commentaries (volumina), which Jerome suggests offer the
greatest witness to Origen’s genius, tend to be denser and to
include extended discussion of the text of a particular scrip-
tural book. Scholia are (to speak anachronistically) short es-
5. According to Prinzivalli, the editio princeps was published by J. Merlin in
1512; Erasmus is numbered among the editors of the text prior to Delarue; see
Prinzivalli, Origene, Omelie sui Salmi (1991), 19.
6. Origène, Homélies sur les Psaumes 36 à 38, ed. Emanuela Prinzivalli, trans.
with intro. and notes by Henri Crouzel and Luc Brésard, Sources Chrétiennes
411 (Paris: Cerf, 1995).
7. Now partially remedied by Caroline P. Hammond Bammel’s Der Römer-
briefkommentar des Origenes: Kritische Ausgabe der Übersetzung Rufins, Buch 1–3
(Freiburg: Herder, 1990).
8. In the preface to his translation of the Hom in Ez [SC 352.30–32], Jerome
writes: ut scias Origenis opuscula in omnem scripturam esse triplicia. Primum eius opus
Excerpta, quae graece σχόλια nuncupantur, in quibus ea quae sibi videbantur obscura
aut habere aliquid difficultatis, summatim breviterque perstrinxit. Secundum homileticum
genus, de quo et praesens interpretatio est. Tertium quod ipse inscripsit τόμους, nos volu-
mina possumus nuncupare, in quo opere tota ingenii sui vela spirantibus ventis dedit et
recedens a terra in medium pelagus aufugit.
9. Also referred to elsewhere as σημειώσεις (“observations” or “remarks”), a
seemingly equivalent term; so Pierre Nautin, Origène: Sa vie et son oeuvre (Paris:
Beauchesne, 1977), 372–73.
 Introduction 5

says or “notes” (often, though not exclusively, philological in

character) relative to particularly problematic passages of the
text. The homilies are transcripts of sermons Origen delivered
to the community at Caesarea, in some cases later polished
or redacted by the preacher. Eusebius indicates that Origen
late in life allowed ταχυγράφοι (notarii, stenographers) to make
transcriptions of his homilies,10 and a number of these homi-
lies are extant, preserved largely in the translations of Jerome
and Rufinus.
Jerome’s Letter 33 to Paula,11 written c. 385 AD, provides a
catalogue of Origen’s works known to him. What may have
been one of Origen’s first ventures into exegesis, a Commentary
on Psalms 1–25, which he composed around 222–225 at Alex-
andria, survives only in fragments.12 P. Nautin has suggested
that there was also a second, more ambitious Commentary on
the Psalms begun at Caesarea13 as well as a set of Excerpta in
(totum) psalterium (later used rather freely by Jerome in his own
Excerpta de psalterio),14 both now extant in fragments.15 Jerome’s
10. Historia ecclesiastica 6.36.1 [SC 41.138]: ὑπὲρ τὰ ἑξήκοντά φασιν ἔτη τὸν
Ὠριγένην γενόμενον, ἅτε δὴ μεγίστην ἤδη συλλεξάμενον ἐκ τῆς μακρᾶς παρασκευῆς
ἕξιν, τὰς ἐπὶ τοῦ κοινοῦ λεγομένας αὐτῷ διαλέξεις ταχυγράφοις μεταλαβεῖν ἐπιτρέψαι, οὐ
πρότερόν ποτε τοῦτο γενέσθαι συγκεχωρηκότα. For Eusebius as intellectual heir to
Origen, see T. D. Barnes, Constantine and Eusebius (Cambridge: Harvard Univer-
sity Press, 1981), 93–105.
11. CSEL 54.253–259. Ilona Opelt, “Origene visto da san Girolamo,” in Au-
gustinianum 26 (1985): 217–22, has questioned the authenticity (at least in its
present form) of Ep. 33. This view has not gained wide acceptance.
12. Cf. Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica 6.24.2 [SC 41.123–125]; Cf. Joseph
W. Trigg, Origen (New York and London: Routledge, 1998), 69–72; on the text
and date, see Pierre Nautin, Origène, 262–75, 371. Jerome, Ep. 33.4 [CSEL
54.255–256], classifies them as Excerpta (σχόλια), and (inaccurately, in the view
of modern scholarship) suggests they treat Psalms 1–15; Eusebius uses neither
of the terms σχόλια and τόμοι in reference to Origen’s treatment of Psalms 1–25,
but mentions them at the same time as he is discussing what we know are his
Commentaries on John, Genesis, and Leviticus, in reference to which he writes
explicitly of τόμοι πέντε.
13. Presumably the one Jerome lists in Ep. 33.4 [CSEL 54.256], beginning
“Rursum in psalmo primo librum I . . .,” and as distinct from what precedes as “Ex-
cerpta in psalmos a primo usque ad quintum decimum,” the latter being a reference
to the Alexandrian Commentary.
14. Edited by G. Morin and printed in CCL 72.163–245.
15. Nautin, Origène: Sa vie et son oeuvre, 275–79, 282–92, suggests another
6 Introduction

list also includes some 120 homilies on 63 different Psalms,

including the nine on Psalms 36–38 extant in the translation
of Rufinus.16 These nine homilies (four of which are found in
Greek in the Munich Codex) are among the only homilies of
Origen on the Psalms to have survived antiquity.17 In fact, with
the exception of various fragments of different authors culled
from the later catenae (the value of which is not unquestioned),
these homilies may be among the earliest extant Christian
treatment of the Psalms in themselves.18

Dating the Homilies on the Psalms

When were these homilies preached? Eusebius claims
that Origen allowed stenographers to transcribe his preach-
ing only after his sixtieth year: ὑπὲρ τὰ ἑξήκοντά φασιν ἔτη τὸν
Ὠριγένην γενόμενον . . . τὰς ἐπὶ τοῦ κοινοῦ λεγομένας αὐτῷ διαλέξεις
ταχυγράφοις μεταλαβεῖν ἐπιτρέψαι.19 If this is the case, then all
the homilies of Origen that are extant date from no earlier
than around 245 AD, a good decade or so after Origen’s ar-

attempt at a Psalm commentary undertaken by Origen at Caesarea and also ex-

tant only in fragments, in addition to the Excerpta.
16. CSEL 54.257–258.
17. Unless one accepts the intriguing argument, though far from universally
accepted, of Vittorio Peri, that Jerome’s Tractatus on the Psalms are substantially
a paraphrase of Origen; see his Omelie origeniane sui Salmi: Contributo all’identifi-
cazione della testo latino (Rome: Vatican, 1980); and now Giovanni Coppa, Settan-
taquattro omelie sul libro dei Salmi: Introduzione, traduzione e note (Turin: Pauline,
1993).
18. Pierre Nautin has reconstructed what he argues is a homily of Hippolytus
on the Psalms, which he has dated as roughly contemporaneous with the Caesar-
ean period of Origen; see Le Dossier d’Hippolyte et de Méliton (Paris: Cerf, 1953),
166–83, and “L’homélie d’Hippolyte sur le psautier et les oeuvres de Josipe,”
in Revue de l’histoire des religions (1971): 147–54. For Perrone’s assessment of the
value of the catenae as witnesses, see “Discovering Origen’s Lost Homilies on the
Psalms,” Auctores Nostri 15 (2015): 19–46, especially 22–23.
19. Historia ecclesiastica 6.36.1 [SC 41.138]. See the full quotation in n. 10
above. The suggestion of J. Christopher King, Origen on the Song of Songs as the
Spirit of Scripture (Oxford: University Press, 2005), 10, that these διαλέξεις—be-
cause they are qualified by Eusebius as “public” (ἐπὶ τοῦ κοινοῦ)—refer not to
his preaching but to his public disputations with Jews and heretics, seems un-
sustainable.
 Introduction 7

rival in Caesarea (conventionally dated to around 232 AD).

Further, there is a piece of internal evidence, found in Homi-
ly 36.1.2, which may help to determine with greater precision
the date of its delivery. In explaining Psalm 36.2 [37.2] (Sicut
fenum cito arescent et sicut holera herbarum cito decident), Origen
refers to Isaiah 40.6 (Caro fenum et omnis gloria ut flos feni),
which prompts an allusion to the vagaries of political power:
“Vide quis imperavit ante hos triginta annos, quomodo imperium eius
effloruit: continuo autem sicut flos feni emarcuit, tunc deinde alius
post ipsum, deinde alius atque alius . . .” 20 This led Harnack, who
accepted Eusebius’s assertion that transcriptions began to be
taken only after Origen’s sixtieth year, to posit this as a refer-
ence to Caracalla (r. 211–217 AD), thus placing their delivery
around 247 AD.21
Pierre Nautin, in attempting to reconstruct a detailed
chron­ology of the life and works of Origen, expressed less
confidence in Eusebius’s reckoning. Taking Origen’s remark
as a reference to Septimius Severus (193–211 AD), Nautin sug-
gested an earlier date, 239–242 AD.22 Further, Nautin attempt-
ed a reconstruction of the liturgical cycle of Origen’s day in
Caesarea, and, on the basis of this reconstruction, proposed
that almost all of the homiletic work of Origen now extant was
preached over this t­ hree-year period, 239–242 AD.23 Nautin’s
view, however, has not been without criticism, and there are
good reasons to reconsider his reconstruction. Lorenzo Per-
rone, drawing on the cache of homilies found in the recent-
ly discovered Munich Codex, has made a strong case for ac-
cepting Eusebius’s assertion that it was only in later life that
Origen allowed transcription of his preaching.24 In fact, the
case has now been made that the Homilies on the Psalms—or at
least a good number of them—can be dated to the last years
of Origen’s life and ministry. Perrone has not been alone in
20. SC 411.62–64.
21. A. Harnack, Geschichte der altchristlichen Litteratur bis Eusebius (Leipzig:
J. C. Hinrichs, 1958), tome 2, vol. 2, 44.
22. Nautin, Origène: Sa vie et son oeuvre, 404–11.
23. Nautin, Origène: Sa vie et son oeuvre, 394–405.
24. Perrone, “The Dating of the New Homilies on the Psalms in the Munich
Codex: The Ultimate Origen?” in ­Proche-Orient Chrétien 67 (2017): 243–51.
8 Introduction

suggesting that Nautin’s hypotheses were based far more on

conjecture than on fact.25 On the basis of a reference Origen
makes in his eighth Homily on Psalm 77, correcting his ear-
lier interpretation of Deuteronomy 32.8–9, one that he had
offered in his Contra Celsum 5.29, Perrone contends that this
particular homily must have been delivered only after Origen
had completed Contra Celsum, and so, along with his Commen-
tary on Matthew, is among the last of the works of Origen, per-
haps from 247–248. This suggestion may be not insignificant
in terms of that particular homily (Hom in Ps 77.8.1).26
Prinzivalli had taken Origen’s passing reference in Homily
36.5.4 27 to a “pacis tempore” as a likely reference to the relative
calm experienced by the Church during the reign of Philip the
Arabian (244–249 AD), and hence further refined the date of
delivery to c. 245–249 AD, a date that is consistent with the wit-
ness of Eusebius and also roughly contemporaneous with the
composition (likely at Athens) of the first five books of his Com-
mentary on the Canticle.28 There is good reason to believe that
many, if not all, of the homilies discovered in the Munich Co-
dex (including the four found in Rufinus’s Latin translation)
may date from the very end of Origen’s ministry in Caesarea
and may represent, in Perrone’s words, “the ultimate Origen.”

Psalmody in Early Christian Life

Evidence for the use of psalmody in early Christian life is
scant, though it is clear from the manuscript evidence that

25. Cf., among others, Adele Monaci Castagno, La biografia di Origene fra sto-
ria e agiografia (Rimini: Pazzini, 2004); and now eadem, “Contesto liturgico e
cronologia della predicazione origeniana alla luce delle nuove Omelie sui Salmi,”
in Adamantius 20 (2014): 238–55.
26. Cf. Perrone, “Discovering Origen’s Lost Homilies,” 24–25, 449–51. For
a rehearsal of this question of dating in relation to the Commentary on Matthew,
see Ronald Heine, The Commentary of Origen on the Gospel of St Matthew (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2018), vol. 1, 24–28; see also idem, Origen: Scholarship
in the Service of the Church (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), 219–21.
27. SC 411.234.
28. Prinzivalli, Origene, Omelie sui Salmi (1991), 17; Crouzel seems to concur,
SC 411.234, n. 2.
 Introduction 9

the Psalms were treasured in Christian circles.29 In Acts (1.20;

13.33–35) the Psalms are understood as prophetic and are
employed in support of the apostolic kerygma: the mystery of
Christ is prefigured in the Psalms. In 1 Corinthians 14.26, the
term ψαλμός is used, but apparently as a generic reference to
hymnody, rather than to a specific text of Scripture. In the
Pauline literature, there are two references to Psalms. In Ephe-
sians 5.19, within a passage that is paraenetic, the author en-
courages his audience to employ psalms, hymns, and spiritual
odes in their common life and worship: λαλοῦντες ἑαυτοῖς ἐν
ψαλμοῖς καὶ ὕμνοις καὶ ᾠδαῖς πνευματικαῖς, ᾄδοντες καὶ ψάλλοντες
τῇ καρδίᾳ ὑμῶν τῷ κυρίῳ. In Colossians 3.16, using a strikingly
similar and gnomic expression, the author exhorts his readers
to use singing as a means of strengthening community life: ἐν
πάσῃ σοφίᾳ διδάσκοντες καὶ νουθετοῦντες ἑαυτούς, ψαλμοῖς ὕμνοις
ᾠδαῖς πνευματικαῖς ἐν τῇ χάριτι ᾄδοντες ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν τῷ
θεῷ. In both cases there is no definitive evidence that these ref-
erences to ψαλμοί need mean anything more than some form
of singing accompanied by harp or stringed instrument (the
original meaning of the term), though the inference may be
drawn that the Psalms of the Old Testament played some part
in the experience of the first Christians, perhaps as prophetic
texts employed in preaching and teaching, but also as a source
of hymnody.
There are three ­post-biblical references to psalmody in
Christian life that are contemporaneous with, or even per-
haps slightly earlier than, Origen’s pastoral activity. The first
is found in the s­ o-called Apostolic Tradition ascribed in mod-
ern times (an ascription now under serious scrutiny) to Hip-
polytus.30 Chapter 29, extant only in an Ethiopic version (and

29. See the study of Larry W. Hurtado, The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manu-
scripts and Christian Origins (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006), 27–29, who con-
tends that, on the basis of the earliest extant manuscripts (codices of the second
and third centuries), the Psalms are rivaled only by the Gospels of Matthew and
John (and, interestingly, the Shepherd of Hermas) in their popularity.
30. On the vexed questions of authorship, provenance, and date, one may
consult the three most recent assessments of the status quaestionis: Alistair
­Stewart-Sykes, Hippolytus: On the Apostolic Tradition (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir
Seminary Press, 2001); Paul Bradshaw, Maxwell Johnson, Harold W. Attridge,
10 Introduction

found in the later Testamentum Domini), 31 is a discussion of

what may be an early form of the lucernarium, an evening ser-
vice of thanksgiving for the light, situated around a common,
­non-eucharistic meal. Having given thanks and having eaten,
29.11 then records, “And when they have risen after the supper
and have prayed, the children and the virgins are to say the
Psalms.”32 Then the deacon is described as “holding the mixed
cup of the oblation, [and he] is to say a Psalm from the ones
over which ‘Hallelujah’ [one of the Hallel Psalms] is written”;
a presbyter and the bishop are also then described as saying
one of these Psalms, the people responding “Hallelujah.” 33
A sharing of the bread then takes place (perhaps something
akin to the antidoron in the Byzantine liturgy today).
There is also the aforementioned Homily on the Psalms at-
tributed to Hippolytus and edited by Nautin. 34 It is clearly
apologetic in nature (Valentinus receives explicit mention),
and treats issues of authorship of the Psalms, their various
titles, and their correct (namely, Christological) interpreta-
tion; these issues, in fact, seem to be the author’s principal
concern. The First and Second Psalms had been read in the
assembly (ἀναδράμωμεν ἐπὶ τὴν ἀνάγνωσιν τὴν γεγενημένην. δύο
ἡμῖν ἀνεγνώσθσηαν ψαλμοί) and form the basis for the author’s
preaching.35 What is clear is that the Psalms were both read in
the assembly and formed the basis for preaching and teaching.
Tertullian’s De oratione, probably intended for catechumens,
dates from before his move toward Montanism (thus before
c. 208 AD). Having provided an explanation of the Lord’s
Prayer, he addresses related, practical questions. He notes that
those more conscientious add an “Alleluia” or a Psalm of sim-

and L. Edward Philips, The Apostolic Tradition (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2002);
and J. A. Cerrato, Hippolytus Between East and West: The Commentaries and the Prov-
enance of the Corpus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002).
31. Following the division of the text as found in Bradshaw et al., 158–60; in
­­Stewart-Sykes’s edition, it is chapter 25.
32. Bradshaw et al., 156.
33. 29.12–15; Bradshaw et al., 156; cf. ­Stewart-Sykes, 135–36.
34. For an English translation, see ­Stewart-Sykes, 175–82. For the Nautin
edition see n. 18 above.
35. Hom in Ps 18; Nautin, Le Dossier d’Hippolyte et de Meliton, 181.
 Introduction 11

ilar kind when praying; those present with them finish it in

response: Diligentiores in orando subiungere in orationibus alleluia
solent et hoc genere psalmos, quorum clausulis respondeant qui simul
sunt.36 He then argues that the worship “in spirit and truth”
taught by Jesus (John 4.23) is accomplished in sincere prayer,
brought to God’s altar and accompanied by the singing of
Psalms: Hanc de toto corde devotam, fide pastam, veritate curatam,
innocentia integram, castitate mundam, agape coronatam cum pom-
pa operum bonorum inter psalmos et hymnos deducere ad Dei altare
debemus omnia nobis a Deo impetraturam.37 From the witness of
Tertullian, then, it can be demonstrated that the Psalms both
formed part of the daily prayer of Christians and were sung in
the liturgy.
The Psalms were clearly part of Christian life at Caesarea, as
they form the basis of Origen’s preaching in the nine homilies
included in Rufinus’s translation. There are two explicit refer-
ences in these homilies relative to the particular use of psalm-
ody. At one point, in a transitional phrase, Origen mentions
that the Psalm had just been read: Denique iste psalmus qui nunc
lectus est, nobis ostendit ut si forte aliquando praevenimur in delictis
qualiter nos et cum quo affectu orare oporteat et medico supplicari pro
doloribus vel infirmitatibus nostris.38 The use of legere can certain-
ly bear the implication “to read out loud” (far more common
in antiquity than reading silently or privately) or “read public-
ly.”39 In Hom in Ps 36.3.6, in glossing Paul’s comment regarding
the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 1.5) that they are rich “in ev-
ery word and in all knowledge,” Origen expresses reservations
about those who know some texts in the Scriptures but not all
of them (they are not rich in every word or all knowledge), even
the hypothetical individual who might be able to “chant the

36. De oratione 27 [CCL 1.273].

37. De oratione 28.4 [CCL 1.273].
38. Hom in Ps 37.1.1 [SC 411.260].
39. OLD, s.v. § 8.b; but see also Michael Slusser, “Reading Silently in Antiq-
uity,” in Journal of Biblical Literature 111 (1992): 499. Cf. a more ambiguous use
of legere in Hom in Ps 36.5.3 [SC 411.232]: Nos ergo si secundum hoc quod legimus,
ore nostro sapientiam et lingua nostra loquatur iudicium et lex Dei sit in cordibus nostris,
adipiscemur illud quod sequitur, “Et non supplantabuntur gressus eius.”
12 Introduction

entire psalter at will”: et integrum psalterium cum voluerit canit.40

This would suggest that the chanting of the Psalms was cer-
tainly known to him, but how and when within (or apart from)
the liturgical assembly this occurred remains uncertain. One
historian of music in Christian liturgy, however, while recog-
nizing the paucity of evidence for ­pre-Constantinian practice,
has observed that in the early centuries, “the public ‘read-
ing’ of scripture and prayers may have had a musical element
(declamation stylized into cantillation). Second, if such chant
were sung, it would no doubt have been answered by congre-
gational acclamations such as ‘Amen,’ ‘Maranatha,’ and ‘Alle-
luia.’”41 This latter statement would seem to be confirmed by
the earlier witness of both Hippolytus and Tertullian. It was in
the fourth century, under the influence of growing urban mo-
nasticism, that psalmody came to be a regular feature of the
Christian eucharistic liturgy, and that a shift in the manner of
its liturgical proclamation occurred: “[f]or much of the fourth
century the Psalm was still considered to be a reading, but it
changed from a slightly inflected reading to a more melodic
chanting.”42 While there are several other texts within Origen’s
extant corpus that make reference to music, none of them re-
fers explicitly to psalmody and there are actually few specifics
to be culled from them.43 Thus, while the Psalms were em-
ployed in Caesarean worship in Origen’s time, there is no way
of determining, on the basis of the evidence available, whether
or not the Psalms were inflected when read, or whether they
were chanted or sung.

40. SC 411.150.
41. William T. Flynn, “Liturgical Music,” in The Oxford History of Christian Wor-
ship, ed. Geoffrey Wainwright and Karen Westerfield Tucker (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2006), 770. For the place of the Psalms in the piety of the early
Church, see Balthasar Fischer, Die Psalmen als Stimme der Kirche: Gesammelte Studi-
en zur christlichen Psalmenfrömmigkeit (Trier: Paulinus, 1982), esp. 15–36.
42. Flynn, 770.
43. Collected and helpfully annotated by James W. McKinnon, Music in Early
Christian Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 36–41.
 Introduction 13

The Translation of Rufinus

As Origen was still in Jerome’s good graces at the time of
his letter to Paula (385 AD), and Rufinus’s work as a translator
of Origen did not commence until after Jerome’s support for
Origen had been reversed (c. 393 AD),44 Crouzel posits 398
AD as the date of Rufinus’s translation of the Homilies on the
Psalms,45 thus shortly after his return to Italy. The first of Ori-
gen’s works Rufinus translated was the De principiis, rendered
into Latin during the spring and summer of 398 AD.46 In the
subsequent fall he turned his attention to the Homilies on the
Psalms, the first of Origen’s exegetical works to receive his at-
tention as translator. It was between 403 and 410 AD that he
translated the other homilies of Origen now extant through
his rendering (those on the Pentateuch and Joshua and Judg-
es) as well as the commentaries on Romans and the Canticle,
the last of Origen’s works to receive his attention.
For some time, the scholarly view was that Rufinus’s trans-
lations of Origen’s works were to be treated with great suspi-
cion. In fact, in the introduction to his translation of De prin-
cipiis, G. W. Butterworth epitomizes this view: “The fact must
be faced that we cannot trust him [Rufinus] . . . [t]here are not
only long additions and omissions, but mistranslations, some
deliberate, some perhaps unconscious, paraphrases in which

44. Jerome’s break with Rufinus and its context are discussed by J. N. D.
Kelly, Jerome; His Life, Writings, and Controversies (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson,
1998), 195–209. See also Caroline P. Hammond Bammel, “The Last Ten Years
of Rufinus’ Life and the Date of his Move South to Aquileia,” in Journal of Theo-
logical Studies n.s. 28 (1977): 372–429, who provisionally dates his translation of
Hom in Ps to 401 (at p. 394); and now Megan Hale Williams, The Monk and the
Book: Jerome and the Making of Christian Scholarship (Chicago: University of Chica-
go Press, 2006), 288–92.
45. SC 411.18. This is consistent with the date suggested by Rufinus’s mod-
ern biographer, F. X. Murphy; see his Rufinus of Aquileia (345–411): His Life and
Works (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1945), 234.
The same date has been established independently by Franca Ela Consolino,
“Le prefazioni di Girolamo e Rufino alle loro traduzioni di Origene,” in Ori-
geniana Quinta, ed. Robert J. Daly (Leuven: Peeters, Leuven University Press,
1992), 92–98.
46. The following relies on the reconstruction of Consolino, 98.
14 Introduction

the point and force of the original is completely lost, and

countless minor alterations which must be studied in detail be-
fore their cumulative effect can be appreciated.”47 This conven-
tional view of Rufinus, however, has recently been challenged.
Nicolà Pace, after a careful comparative study of Rufinus’s Lat-
in translation of the De principiis and the extant Greek text,
has made the case that this conventional view is unduly harsh
and misleading.48 In Pace’s view, Rufinus’s fundamental con-
cern was to make Origen accessible to a Latin audience. He
sometimes lacked nuance and an appropriate Latin vocabu-
lary with which to express Origen’s Greek (especially in regard
to technical philosophical terminology). The extent, however,
to which Rufinus might have altered, truncated, or added to
the text to accommodate it to later standards of orthodoxy is
by and large limited, Pace argues, to matters of Trinitarian
expression. In fact, on the basis of passages that can be com-
pared to extant fragments, Pace suggests that Rufinus’s trans-
lation is generally reliable in matters of Origen’s protology
(including, for example, issues of the ­pre-existence of souls)
and eschatology, topics that seem not to have been a doctri-
nal concern to Rufinus. Pace’s conclusions regarding Rufinus’s
work in rendering De principiis can reasonably be applied to
his other translations; in fact, Crouzel concurs with Pace’s con-
clusions in regard to the quality of Rufinus’s translation of the
Homilies on the Psalms.49 Subsequent examination and analysis

47. G. W. Butterworth, trans. and ed., Origen: On First Principles (Gloucester,

MA: Peter Smith, 1973), xlvii.
48. Nicolà Pace, Ricerche sulla Traduzione di Rufino del De principiis di Origene
(Florence: La Nuova Italia Editrice, 1990). Cf. the helpful and perceptive anal-
ysis of Pace’s argument offered by Joseph W. Trigg, “Origen and Origenism in
the 1990s,” Religious Studies Review 22 (1996): 301–8, esp. 302–3. Cf. also Annie
Jaubert’s comments on Rufinus as translator in her edition of Origen’s Hom in
Jos, SC 71.68–82, as well as Ronald Heine’s assessment of Rufinus as transla-
tor in his translation of Origen, Homilies on Genesis and Exodus, Fathers of the
Church 71 (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1982),
25–39. For an analysis of Rufinus’s technique (relative, however, to another au-
thor and work), see Anna Silvas, “Rufinus’ Translation Techniques in the Regula
Basili,” in Antichthon 37 (2003): 71–93.
49. SC 411.11–12; of course, this is based on conjecture and the few Greek
fragments available to him.
 Introduction 15

of the Greek text of the Homilies on the Psalms found in the

Munich Codex alongside the Latin translation of Rufinus has
led Emanuela Prinzivalli essentially to confirm the assessment
of Pace.50
Further, research into the theory of translation in antiquity
supports a more generous estimation of Rufinus’s efforts and
intent. 51 There were two principal approaches to translating
an ancient text from one tongue to another: ad verbum, a liter-
al, w
­ ord-for-word rendering; and ad sensum, an approach that
sought to convey the idea or meaning of the text without be-
ing bound by a literal formulation and that sought to capture
the eloquence of the Greek original (perhaps something akin
to what, in contemporary discussion, has been termed “dy-
namic equivalence”). Cicero was the principal theorist of this
approach; for it was his desire and contention that the Greek
classics be made available in (and in fact outdone by) Latin
translation. 52 In the course of his career, Jerome engaged in
numerous translations, but offered no consistent theory of
translation. In fact, his views on the matter varied depending
upon the context. Initially, he held that translation ad sensum
was preferable, but that for the text of Scripture, a more literal
rendering was desirable; he was, however, hardly consistent in
his views, and polemic and his own defensiveness often caused
his views—and his presentation of himself—to be shifted.53
Scholars, in comparing the translations of Jerome and
Rufinus—and due in no small part to Jerome’s own ­self-
promotion as the more careful translator—have tended per-
haps too summarily to judge Rufinus’s translations as para-
phrastic and thus at best less than reliable, or at worst deliber-

50. GCS n.f. 19, Origenes XIII, 34–57.

51. An unpublished paper by William Adler, “Ad verbum or ad sensum: The
Christianization of a Latin Translation Formula in the Fourth Century,” present-
ed at the American Society of Church History, Williamsburg, Virginia, April 1,
1993; cf. also Paolo Chiesa, “Ad verbum o ad sensum? Modelli e coscienza met-
odologica della traduzione tra tarda antichità e alto medioevo,” in Medioevo e
Rinascimento 1 (1987): 1–51; Heinrich Marti, Übersetzer der A
­ ugustin-Zeit (Munich:
­Wilhelm-Fink, 1974), 61–72.
52. Adler, 2.
53. Adler, 17–23.
16 Introduction

ately deceptive. In the words, however, of one recent defender

and promoter of Origen—whose provocative argument seeks
to distance Origen from Platonism—“while the translations of
Rufinus may be free, they have not been proved to be men-
dacious,”54 and, “Rufinus is a discreet translator rather than a
dishonest one, and generally his version [of the De principiis]
shows some traces of the errors laid to Origen’s account by his
traducers,”55 thus suggesting that Rufinus cannot be flatly ac-
cused of conniving to alter Origen’s text in a substantial way
(Rufinus himself was convinced that others had maliciously al-
tered the Greek text of Origen).56 Elizabeth Clark, in her care-
ful study of the recurring Origenist controversies, has demon-
strated—and this confirms the research of Pace—that Rufinus
found little objectionable in Origen’s protology and eschatol-
ogy (matters that Rufinus viewed as still undefined or unset-
tled matters of theological speculation). 57 The earlier view that
Rufinus willfully altered the text of Origen simply to conform
his thought to later standards of orthodoxy may, then, be too
simplistic and seems to have given way in contemporary schol-
arship to a more positive appreciation of Rufinus’s efforts,
even with an admission that he might have been hampered
by a kind of theological or philosophical naïveté; and what
might be inferred to be naïveté could quite plausibly be ac-
counted for as a kind of pastoral attentiveness to the particular
needs or capacity of his intended reader. In any case, the view
of Rufinus as, given the standards of his age, a largely faithful
translator, even if at times inclined to moralizing and extra­
polation on Origen’s words, has been supported by the study
of Antonio Grappone.58 It remains a question whether, despite
his ­self-presentation, Jerome was himself any more theologi-

54. Mark J. Edwards, Origen against Plato (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002), 5.

55. Edwards, 91.
56. Cf. his De adulteratione librorum Origenis [CCL 20.1–17], originally ap-
pended to his translation of Pamphilus’s Apology, and forming part of his arsenal
against the recriminations of Jerome and others.
57. Elizabeth A. Clark, The Origenist Controversy: The Cultural Construction of
an Early Christian Debate (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992), 166–71.
58. Antonio Grappone, Omelie origeniane nella traduzione di Rufino. Un confron-
to con i testi greci (Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 2007).
 Introduction 17

cally astute than Rufinus, whose translations have been held

suspect by later minds because of his freer style of translation.
Until the discovery of the Munich Codex, the principal,
though quite incomplete, source for much of the Greek of Ori-
gen’s preaching, including the Homilies on the Psalms, was the
catenae. The Greek fragments of these homilies published in
Migne59 and by Cardinal Pitra60 are taken from what G. Dorival
has identified as the earliest Palestinian catena on the Psalms,
assembled at Caesarea by an otherwise unknown pupil of Pro-
copius of Gaza († c. 538) and preserved in a 9th/10th century
manuscript now at Oxford, Baroccianus Graecus 235. Dorival
contends that this manuscript was the exemplar for the other
extant witnesses.61 This early catena also includes glosses taken
from Asterius, Athanasius, Basil, Cyril of Alexandria, Didymus,
Eusebius, Gregory of Nazianzus, John Chrysostom, Severus,
and Theodoret.62 Dorival’s research has revealed the complex
textual history of the various catenae on the Psalms, including,
for example, the likelihood that a later significant witness,
Parisinus Graecus 139, is a conflation of a later, second Pales-
tinian catena with another catena that he describes as a para-
phrase.63 While Baroccianus Graecus 235, from which the Greek
fragments of the Homilies on the Psalms have been culled, is an
arguably reliable witness to Origen’s Greek (and so further
demonstrating Rufinus’s basic fidelity as a translator), given
the existence and influence of catenae that are paraphrastic, in
general the Greek catenae must be treated with some reserve.64

59. PG 17.117–36.
60. J. B. Pitra, Analecta Sacra spicilegio Solesmensi parata, 8 vols. (Farnborough:
Gregg, 1966), vol.3, pp. 13–34.
61. Gilles Dorival, Les chaînes exégétiques grecques sur les Psaumes: Contribution
à l’étude d’une forme littéraire, 4 vols., vol. 1 (Leuven: Peeters, 1986), 99–127. Cf.
also Robert Devreesse, Les anciens commentateurs grecs de Psaumes, Studi et Tes-
ti 264 (Rome: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1970), esp. 14–17; Ekkehard
Mühlenberg, Psalmenkommentare aus der Katenenüberlieferung, 3 vols., vol. 1 (Ber-
lin: De Gruyter, 1975–1978), 44–45.
62. Dorival, 123.
63. Dorival, 122–24.
64. See CPG 1428; various fragments on the Psalms (also culled from later
catenae) attributed to Origen can be found in PG 12.1085–1320, 1409–1686,
and PG 17.105–149. The Greek fragments of the Hom in Ps 36–38 (those known
18 Introduction

The Assessment of Erasmus

Erasmus (1466–1536) himself, in a series of brief evalua-
tions of Origen’s works,65 raised questions about the authentic-
ity of the Homilies on the Psalms in Rufinus’s translation (which
Erasmus refers to as Commentarii in tres Psalmos).66 He begins
by remarking that “I am of two minds about this work” (De hoc
opere sum ancipiti sententia), and he notes that the style (phrasis)
is more like (propius) that of Chrysostom, perhaps because of
the moral tenor of the homilies. He suggests the possibility
that someone other than Rufinus authored the translation, or
perhaps that Rufinus, in character, cribbed another’s work.67
Further, he is critical of the translation itself, referring to it
variously as clumsy, without feeling, borrowed, and contrived.68
He does note Rufinus’s own remarks about his translation of
these homilies, found in the Epilogue he appended to his
translation of Origen’s Commentary on Romans,69 where he
makes clear that, “As for the homilies on Joshua, Judges, and
on Psalms ­thirty-six, ­thirty-seven, and ­thirty-eight, I translated
them simply as I found them and without much effort.”70 One

prior to the discovery of the Munich manuscript) are published in the appendix
of the editions of Prinzivalli, Origene, Omelie sui Salmi (1991), 471–91, and Crou-
zel, SC 411.408–453. As an indication of the daunting task of sifting through
the layers of construction in the catenae, see Cordula Bandt, “Origen in the
Catenae on Psalms,” in Adamantius 20 (2014): 238–55.
65. Which he calls Censurae (“Critiques”); see Desiderii Erasmi Roterdami Opera
Omnia, ed. Jean Leclercq (Lugduni Batavorum, 1703–4), 8.434. For a summary
of Erasmus’s assessment, see André Godin, Érasme lecteur d’Origène (Geneva: Li-
brarie Droz, 1982), 612–14.
66. In fact, his conclusion is that someone (whether Rufinus or another) has
taken a commentary on these Psalms and recast them as homilies: suspicor enim
Ruffinum, aut si quis fuit alius, haec vertisse liberius e commentario perpetuo, at 8.434.
67. Erasmus 8.434: Suspicor enim qui scripsit fuisse Latinum, aut si vertit
Ruffinus, more suo quod alienum erat fecit suum tractando, hoc est, contaminando. The
use of contaminare (OLD s.v. § 2b) insinuates the introduction of inferior, foreign
material (aliena) as well as mere mistranslation.
68. Erasmus 8.434: Sunt quaedam dure, quaedam frigide interpretata, quaedam
aliena et ascititia.
69. For the text, see CCL 20.276–777.
70. CCL 20.276: Nam illa quae in Jesum Nave et in Judicum et in tricesimum
 Introduction 19

reason for a remark like this might, however, have been apol-
ogetic: Rufinus’s epilogue was written in 405–406 AD,71 not
long after Jerome’s Apology 72 against him (401 AD), in which
Jerome defends his own alternative translation (now lost) of De
principiis as having been rendered from the Greek simpliciter.73
Perhaps this was Rufinus’s way of defending himself and his
earlier translations (c. 398–403 AD).
Erasmus continues his assessment by noting the awkward-
ness of Rufinus’s handling of the Greek text of Psalm 36.1 (μὴ
παραζήλου ἐν πονηρευομένοις), found in Homily 36.1.1,74 as well as
the choice of non gentem (see LXX Deuteronomy 32.21: ἐπ’ οὐκ
ἔθνει) as applied to Christians in the same context.75 Erasmus is
also perplexed by the halting construction of the preface (Jam
praefatio videtur inanibus et male cohaerentibus sensiculis consarci-
nata), which he notes never even offers the name of the orig-
inal author, and which—even granting that Rufinus had ren-
dered this translation (a premise to which Erasmus seems less
than fully committed)—is hardly reflective of Rufinus’s other-
wise generally fluent prose (certe natura facundus). Regardless,
the work does not reflect Origen’s usual felicity of expression
(modo fateamur operis genium non referre Origenicam felicitatem).76
Rufinus’s own words (referred to by Erasmus) about his
translation of these homilies, as well as a piece of internal evi-
dence, may offer an explanation of the style of the translations
that so provoked Erasmus and which is, at times, noticeably un-
balanced. Rufinus himself had noted that, among several oth-
er works of Origen, he translated the homilies on the Psalms

sextum et tricesimum septimum et tricesimum octavum psalmum scripsimus, simpliciter ut

invenimus, et non multo cum labore transtulimus.
71. Consolino, 98.
72. Hale Williams, 294.
73. Apologia contra Rufinum 1.7 [CCL 79.6–7]; see Adler, 23, on the apologet-
ic nature of Rufinus’s remarks.
74. SC 411.54–56.
75. A criticism, it would seem, here leveled more at the author than the
translator; it is interesting that Erasmus’s criticisms of the translation are limited
to the preface and the first few pages of the first homily; he offers nothing about
the text beyond this.
76. Erasmus 8.434.
20 Introduction

“simply as I found them and without much effort.”77 For exam-

ple, in Hom in Ps 37.2.1, there is found a lengthy dependent
clause without a genuine apodosis:
Licet amici mei et proximi mei contrarii sint et propinqui mei longe se faciant
a me, dum ego ipse mei accusator efficior, dum crimina mea nullo me ar-
guente confiteor, dum nolo imitari eos, qui etiam cum in iudiciis arguantur
et testibus convincantur et etiam tortoribus arguantur, tegunt tamen mala
sua et plus apud eos obtinet commissi pudor quam cruciantis poena.78

One would expect Rufinus to have tidied up this irregularity

or to have attempted to emend this in his translation. He ap-
pears not to have done so, and this may indicate that he can
be taken quite literally at his word (simpliciter ut invenimus, et
non multo cum labore transtulimus). Thus the use of the phrase
simpliciter ut invenimus may be more than an apologetic aside
in response to criticism by Jerome,79 and may also be an honest
admission that he simply spent little time crafting a polished
translation.
These irregularities might also be explained by positing
that the manuscript with which he worked was perhaps no
more than a notarius’s copy, a transcript neither reviewed nor
edited by Origen himself. This would indeed explain some of
the oddities of style: namely, that Rufinus’s manuscript was no
more than a stenographer’s transcript of a viva voce delivery
and that Rufinus did not take the time or effort to emend the
work as he translated.80 In support of this hypothesis, Michael
Frede has identified a similar problem in the text of the Con-
tra Celsum.81 At 1.28, the second sentence is a doublet of the
first, leading scholars to conjecture that Origen dictated the

77. CCL 20.276.

78. SC 411.302–304; this is a text not found among the homilies in the Mu-
nich manuscript, and thus for which the Greek is not extant.
79. Cf. Adler, 23.
80. On the scriptorium at Caesarea, see Anthony Grafton and Megan Wil-
liams, Christianity and the Transformation of the Book: Origen, Eusebius, and the Li-
brary of Caesarea (Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 2006), 68–70.
81. Michael Frede, “Origen’s Treatise Against Celsus,” in Apologetics in the Ro-
man Empire: Pagans, Jews, and Christians, ed. Mark Edwards, Martin Goodman,
and Simon Price, with Christopher Rowland (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1999), 131–55.
 Introduction 21

preface after having begun 1.28 (Origen himself states this in

the preface), and then took up where he left off, reduplicating
the sentence where he had paused to compose the preface.82
Frede suggests that this both explains how Origen could be so
prolific a writer, in that he relied on stenographers to whom
he could readily and easily dictate, and, further, indicates that
Origen might have been less than attentive in ­proof-reading or
revising texts once dictated. As Frede puts it: “And we also see
that Origen cannot have ­proof-read, as it were, at the end—at
least not with care—as otherwise he would have deleted the
second sentence. It looks as if Origen, having dictated the text,
left its further production to others.”83 One cannot posit a pat-
tern on the basis of a singular instance, but it does offer some
substantiation to the possibility that the text of the Homilies on
the Psalms from which Rufinus was working was itself not care-
fully ­proof-read or edited by Origen.84

The Preface of Rufinus

Rufinus’s dedicatory preface to his translation of the Homi-
lies on the Psalms offers some insight into his understanding of
them. The preface is addressed to Apronianus. The Roman
senator Turcius Apronianus, his wife Avita, and their daugh-
ter Eunomia are mentioned twice by Palladius,85 who records
82. For the English text, see Henry Chadwick (who notes the difficulty), Ori-
gen: Contra Celsum (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953): preface 6 at
pp. 5–6, the doublet at pp. 27–28.
83. Frede, “Origen’s Treatise Against Celsus,” 141.
84. It would be worth pursuing, though not here, an examination of the
other homilies that Rufinus claimed to have translated simpliciter . . . et non multo
cum labore, those on Joshua and Judges. See the assessment of Annie Jaubert, SC
71.69, who characterizes Rufinus’s efforts in translating the Hom in Jos as “par-
fois hâtive” (“sometimes hasty”), but who is convinced of his ultimate fidelity to
Origen’s thought.
85. Lausiac History 41.5 and 54.4 (c. 419–420 AD), in La Storia Lausiaca, ed.
G. J. M. Bartelink (Milan: Fondazione Lorenzo Valla, 1974), 212 and 246–48;
cf. Robert Meyer, Palladius: The Lausiac History (Westminster, MD: Newman
Press, 1965), 119, 135, and his helpful annotations, 203–4, as well as Erwin
Preuschen, Palladius und Rufinus: Ein Beitrag zur Quellenkunde des ältesten Mönch-
tums: Texte und Untersuchungen (Giessen: J. Rickersche, 1897). It was Apronianus
who conveyed to Rufinus Jerome’s correspondence with Pammachius critical of
Rufinus, thus prompting Rufinus’s own Apology against Jerome (401 AD) [see CCL
22 Introduction

that Apronianus was converted by Melania the Elder, his wife’s

aunt. Apronianus and Avita are also praised by their friend
and contemporary Paulinus of Nola in one of his Carmina.86
The entire family had embraced an ascetic life, and Aproni-
anus and his wife had elected to live in continence.87 In ad-
dition to his translation of the Homilies on the Psalms, Rufinus
also dedicated his translations of the Homilies of Basil, Grego-
ry of Nazianzus’s Orations, and the Sentences of Sextus to Apro-
nianus.88 These works were all undertaken about the time
Rufinus had returned to Aquileia from the East, following a
brief sojourn at Rome,89 thus late in 398.90
It would seem that it was particularly the moral teaching
of both the Sentences and the Homilies on the Psalms, and his
desire to share that teaching with Apronianus, that prompted
Rufinus’s choice of these works for translation. Further, it is
intriguing that in the prefaces he wrote both for the Sentences
translation and for Origen’s Homilies on the Psalms, Avita, wife
of Apronianus, figures significantly as the principal beneficia-
ry of this moral teaching. In his preface to the Sentences trans-
lation,91 Rufinus wrote: Religiosa filia mea, soror iam in Christo
tua,92 poposcerat me ut ei aliquid quod legeret tale conponerem, ubi

20.37]; on this series of events, see J. N. D. Kelly, Jerome: His Life, Writings, and
Controversies (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998), 249–51.
86. Carmen 21.60ff (c. 407 AD) [CSEL 30.160–162]; see P. G. Walsh, The Po-
ems of Paulinus of Nola, Ancient Christian Writers 40 (Westminster, MD: Newman
Press, 1975), 175ff.
87. Lausiac History 54.4 (ed. Bartelink, 246–248); see also Hammond Bam-
mel, “The Last Ten Years,” 386–87.
88. See CCL 20.255, 259. On the chronology, see Hammond Bammel, “The
Last Ten Years,” 387.
89. It was at Rome, just prior to his departure for Aquileia, thus c. 397, where
he produced his translations of the Rule of Basil, the Apology of Pamphilus, and
the De principiis, as well as authoring his own De adulteratione librorum Origenis; see
Hammond Bammel, “The Last Ten Years,” 386.
90. So Hammond Bammel, “The Last Ten Years,” 387; cf. Consolino, 96–98.
91. Rufinus, like many of his contemporaries, assumed the Sentences to be
the teaching of Pope Sixtus (Xystus) II († 258 AD); in all likelihood, they reflect
Pythagorean teaching. On this, see Henry Chadwick, The Sentences of Sextus: A
Contribution to the History of Early Christian Ethics (Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, 1959), esp. 117–19.
92. Hammond Bammel takes this reference as an indication of their recent
 Introduction 23

neque laboraret in intellegendo et tamen proficeret in legendo, aperto

et satis plano sermone.93 He refers as well to Avita in his preface
to his translations of Origen’s Homilies on the Psalms, writing Ne
forte religiosa filia mea, soror in Christo tua, ingrata sit operi nostro,
si id semper laboriosum intellectui suo pro asperitate sentiat quaestio-
num.94 The implication is relatively clear: it was Avita perhaps
more than Apronianus who had pressed Rufinus (poposcerat
me) for the translation of such works, and it is precisely the
accessibility of their moral teaching that Rufinus highlights
in each preface. While in his translation he characterizes the
teaching of the Sentences as patent and clear (aperto et satis plano
sermone), and while he likens this little enchiridion to a small
ring (annulus) that can be easily carried in hand, its potent
teaching is nonetheless directed toward moral perfection (ut
unius versus sententia ad totius possit perfectionem vitae sufficere).95
The Homilies on the Psalms provide, without much effort on the
part of the reader (absque labore lectoris), teaching on simplicity
of life (vitae simplicitas) and moral progress (profectionem mo-
rum) in language that is clear and straightforward (sensu lucido
et simplici sermone).96 This simplicity of language, he contends,
makes the teaching of these collected homilies beneficial not
only to men, but also to devout women (presumably the likes
of Avita and Eunomia),97 and serves as a source of nourish-
ment even to more simple, less sophisticated souls (ex quo pro-
fectus pervenire non solum ad viros, verum etiam ad religiosas femi-
nas possit et excolere simplices mentes).98 Rufinus’s decision, then,
to translate almost simultaneously these two works stems, it
would seem, from Avita’s request and the need to make accessi-
ble works on moral or spiritual progress and perfection of life
in clear, simple language,99 and likely reflects Rufinus’s con-

decision to live in continence; see Hammond Bammel, “The Last Ten Years,”
387.
93. CCL 20.259.
94. SC 411.46 [= CCL 20.251].
95. CCL 20.259.
96. SC 411.46 [= CCL 20.251].
97. So Prinzivalli, Origene, Omelie sui Salmi (1991), 26–28.
98. SC 411.46 [= CCL 20.251].
99. Both of these works, the Sentences and the Homilies on the Psalms—as
24 Introduction

sciousness of this fact in his s­ elf-presentation as translator and

authentic expositor of ascetical teaching for a ­Latin-speaking
literary clientele.100
Rufinus observes immediately the moral character of these
nine homilies (expositio tota moralis est)101 and the fact that they
reveal certain principles for a reformed way of life and prog-
ress in it (instituta quaedam vitae emendatioris ostendens . . . ad
emendationem vel profectionem morum). He describes the transla-
tion as providing an example of preaching (dictio) that is de-
voted entirely to improvement and moral progress. He further
suggests that the teaching of the homilies might be divided
into two aspects or stages, each bipartite: conversion and pen-
ance, healing and progress (nunc conversionis ac paenitentiae,
nunc purgationis et profectuum). The fact that Rufinus seems to
view these nine homilies together as a group is significant as
well, and his characterization of them as fundamentally moral
likely derives from Origen’s own comments in the first homily
in the series. Hom in Ps 36.1 begins by quoting Hebrews 1.1,

well as the fact that Rufinus produced translations of them almost simultane-
ously—could be characterized as providing for Apronianus and Avita a kind of
­ascetical-moral handbook or florilegium, as Rufinus himself indicates in his Pref-
ace to the Hom in Ps [SC 411.46]: Idcirco tibi eam, Aproniane fili carissime, in novem
oratiunculis, quas Graeci ὁμιλίας vocant velut in uno corpore digestam in Latinum tran-
stuli, ut intra unum codicem collectam haberes dictionem, quae ad emendationem vel
profectionem morum tota respiceret. On the role of texts in Hellenistic moral philos-
ophy, see Martha C. Nussbaum, The Therapy of Desire: Theory and Practice in Hel-
lenistic Ethics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), esp. 336–38, whose
characterization of Stoic views on the nature and importance of texts reveals
the fissures between Hellenistic moral philosophy and what Rufinus (arguably
reflecting the main contours of the early Christian ascetical enterprise) is under-
taking here. On what distinguished the Christian appreciation of the sacred text
and its use in the ascetic enterprise v­ is-à-vis the way texts functioned among their
pagan and philosophical forebears and contemporaries, see A. N. Williams, The
Divine Sense: The Intellect in Patristic Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2007), 12–14.
100. Cf. the verdict of Mark Vessey, “Jerome and Rufinus,” in The Cambridge
History of Early Christian Literature, ed. Frances Young, Lewis Ayres, and Andrew
Louth (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 325: “Had they sur-
vived, his ‘many’ letters would doubtless have confirmed his proficiency as a
teacher of ascetic piety.”
101. SC 411.46 [= CCL 20.251].
 Introduction 25

and Origen then distinguishes between Scriptures whose pur-

pose is to instruct the reader in mysteries transcending human
speech (ineffabilia sacramenta), those that teach about Christ
and the Incarnation (de salvatore et de eius adventu), and those
that aim to correct and reform one’s manner of life (mores nos-
tros corrigit et emendat).102 He then speaks in reference to Psalm
36: Incipientes igitur explanationem tricesimi sexti Psalmi, invenimus
quod totus Psalmus iste moralis est et velut cura quaedam ac medicina
humanae animae datus.103 Thus Rufinus is here perhaps simply
following Origen’s lead in understanding these Psalms as fun-
damentally moral in tenor.

Origen on Scripture and

Anthropology
The locus classicus for understanding the relation of Scrip-
ture and anthropology in Origen is De principiis 4.2.4.104
While introducing the reader to the proper way to read Scrip-
ture and grasp its meaning (φαινομένη ἡμῖν ὁδὸς τοῦ πῶς δεῖ
ἐντυγχάνειν ταῖς γραφαῖς καὶ τὸν νοῦν αὐτῶν ἐκλαμβάνειν), he sug-
gests it is necessary that the threefold (τριχῶς) meaning of the
Scriptures be copied or inscribed (ἀπογράφεσθαι) on the soul
102. SC 411.50.
103. Ibid.
104. GK 708–710; cf. Karen Jo Torjesen, “‘Body,’ ‘Soul,’ and ‘Spirit’ in Ori-
gen’s Theory of Exegesis,” in Anglican Theological Review 67 (1985):17–30, and
the classic study of Henri de Lubac, “Tripartite Anthropology,” in Theology in
History, trans. Anne Englund Nash (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1996), 117–200,
esp. his treatment of Origen, 130–44. On the overarching purpose of the work
­vis-à-vis the correct reading of Scripture, see Brian Daley, “Origen’s De Principi-
is: A Guide to the Principles of Christian Scriptural Interpretation,” in Vetera et
Nova: Patristic Studies in Honor of Thomas Patrick Halton, ed. John Petruccione
(Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1998), 3–21; and
now as well John Behr’s substantial introduction to his ­two-volume edition of
Origen: On First Principles (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018). On early
Christian reading of Scripture and exegetical strategies, see the excellent essay
of John Cavadini, “From Letter to Spirit: The Multiple Senses of Scripture,” in
The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Biblical Interpretation, ed. Paul M. Blowers
and Peter W. Martens (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019), 126–48; for a
recent study of Origen as exegete, see Peter W. Martens, Origen and Scripture: The
Contours of the Exegetical Life (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014).
26 Introduction

of the reader or hearer. In this context, Origen refers to the

“flesh” (σάρξ / corpus) of the Scriptures, which nourishes sim-
pler ones (ἁπολούστεροι / simpliciores) with what he calls the “ob-
vious” or “literal interpretation” (πρόχειρον ἐκδοχήν).105 He then
speaks of the individual who is more advanced (ὁ δὲ ἐπὶ ποσὸν
ἀναβεβηκώς), who is edified by the “soul” (ψυχή / anima) of the
Scriptures. Finally, the one who is perfect (ὁ τέλειος) benefits
from the “spiritual law” (πνευματικὸς νόμος / spiritalis lex). This
“spiritual law” contains a “shadow” (σκία) of the things to
come.106 This tripartite anthropology (body–soul–spirit) is
thus reflected in the very fiber of the Scriptures, ordered by di-
vine goodness toward human salvation. Karen Torjesen, how-
ever, while recognizing the relation between anthropology and
the sacred text, has shrewdly warned against too facile an un-
derstanding of their exact or exclusive correspondence. Basing
her research on Origen’s practice of preaching,107 she contends
that one must not see these three senses or levels of meaning
as each directed to a particular kind of hearer (and so in some
sense mimicking or assuming gnostic anthropology), but rath-
er as simultaneously directed toward the pedagogy of the soul
among all hearers, regardless of whether they be considered
among the simpliciores or the more advanced.108
Origen’s understanding of these three constituents of the
human person is itself derived from Scripture: in 1 Thessalo-
nians 5.23, Paul exhorts:
αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης ἁγιάσαι ὑμᾶς ὁλοτελεῖς καὶ ὁλόκληρον ὑμῶν τὸ
πνεῦμα καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ τὸ σῶμα ἀμέμπτως ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν
᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ τηρηθείη [Ipse autem Deus pacis santificet vos per omnia:

105. For Origen, the “literal” meaning is just that: the words and their se-
quence, the text on the page. Modern understandings of “literal” meaning are
tied to authorial intention in a way that is not the case for Origen; see Crouzel,
Origen, 62.
106. Origen quotes Hebrews 10.1; cf. Hom in Ps 38.2.2 [SC 411.374–382].
107. Theoretical formulations are hardly ever employed rigidly; it is the
mistake of much contemporary history of exegesis to regard such theoretical
expressions too seriously.
108. Torjesen, “‘Body,’ ‘Soul,’ and ‘Spirit,’” 17–30; see also Frances Young,
Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, 1997), 242.
 Introduction 27

ut integer spiritus vester, et anima, et corpus sine querela in adventu Domini

nostri Jesu Chrisi servetur].109

This expression of the apostolic kerygma, far more than sim-

ply the philosophic koin ē of his day,110 formed Origen’s un-
derstanding of the human person. Most obviously, σῶμα or
corpus refers to the physical dimension of individual human
existence, and in Origen (who simply follows Paul), this is to
be distinguished from σάρξ or caro, which almost always has
a pejorative sense. The noun πνεῦμα or spiritus refers to the
capacity of the individual to share in God’s Spirit, though this
spiritus may, in fact, remain dormant, in a sense, in one who
is not engaged in things divine; thus in some it remains only
a potentiality. The notion of ψυχή or anima (occasionally ani-
mus)111 is complex.112 It has a higher dimension or activity, gen-
erally referred to as νοῦς (mens), the term common in Platonic
usage, and is sometimes expressed in language roughly equiv-
alent to the Stoics’ preferred terminology, τὸ ἡγεμονικόν; this is

109. On this, see Edwards, Origen against Plato, 135–37; the bulk of the de-
scription that follows relies heavily upon the account of Crouzel, Origen, 87–90.
110. This, of course, is the thrust of Edwards’s argument: Origen is far more
a biblical theologian than a mere cipher for the Hellenistic varieties of Pla-
tonism.
111. The noun animus occurs ten times in the Homilies on the Psalms: 36.5.6
[SC 411.246]; 37.1.1 [SC 411.262]; 37.1.5 [SC 411.290]; 37.2.1 [SC 411.300];
37.2.1 [SC 411.304]; 37.2.3 [SC 411.308]; 38.1.3 [SC 411.338]; 38.1.5 [SC
411.344]; in some cases, it seems no more than an alternative to anima; in oth-
ers, it seems more precisely an expression for mens (νοῦς); twice it is linked with
mens: mente et animo, 38.1.11 [SC 411.366] and 38.2.2 [SC 411.378]. On the
ambiguous relationship—at times seemingly synonymous—between anima and
mens in Origen, see De principiis 2.8.2 [GK 386] and 2.11.5 [GK 448]. Crouzel
consistently renders both anima and animus as âme.
112. For the (faulty) etymology that derives ψυχή from ψύχεσθαι (“to grow
cool”), see Origen’s discussion in De principiis 2.8.3 [GK 390–392]. The words
are perhaps cognates, but not as Origen relates them: the relation of the words
has more to do with “breathing” and “breath” than “growing cool.” See now
also the fine work of Benjamin Blosser, Become Like the Angels: Origen’s Doctrine
of the Soul (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2012),
who argues that Origen, while working with philosophical precedent, was none-
theless free from any simplistic replication of Middle Platonist psychology and
that the most important features of his doctrine of the soul are governed by the
Scriptures.
28 Introduction

usually rendered by the Latin principale cordis 113 or principalis

intellectus.114 Origen understands the biblical term καρδία (cor)
as expressive of, and basically equivalent to, this higher activity
or νοῦς;115 in his De oratione he explicitly equates the biblical
term καρδία with the Stoic term τὸ ἡγεμονικόν.116 ψυχή also has
a lower dimension or activity, which Origen usually charac-
terizes as σάρξ or caro, a tag deriving ultimately from Romans
8.6, τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκός, “the understanding (or wisdom) of
the flesh.”117 This is usually found in the Latin as carnalis sapi-
entia,118 sensus carnalis / carnis,119 or prudentia carnis.120 Crouzel
suggests that it is better to understand these higher and lower
dimensions less as “component parts” and more like “tenden-
cies”: either elevating the soul to things of the Spirit or draw-
ing it downward toward the transient and material (typified
as “flesh” or “fleshly”). The soul (or more precisely, its will),
Origen provisionally proposes in De principiis, functions, as it
were, as a kind of “medium” between the flesh and the spirit:
Et si ita est, constat quod huius animae voluntas media quaedam est
inter carnem et spiritum, uni sine dubio e duobus serviens et obtemper-
ans.121 The life of faith is the life of assimilation to the Spirit,
so that, rather than becoming “carnal” or “fleshly” by associa-
tion with lower things, the soul (including its lower dimension
or tendency) might be healed, elevated, and, as it were, perme-
ated by the Spirit.122 This schema provides the background to
113. As in Rufinus’s translation of the Comm in Cant 1.2.3; 6; 7 [SC 375.192;
194] and in Jerome’s translation of Origen’s Hom in Ez 3 [PL 25.714C].
114. As found in Hom in Ps 36.1.4 [SC 411.82].
115. See Edwards, “Christ or Plato?” 16–18; for cor in this sense, see Hom in
Ps 36.1.2 [SC 411.68]; Hom in Ps 36.3.2 [SC 411.132–134]; Hom in Ps 36.4.1
[SC 411.184]; Hom in Ps 36.5.3 [SC 411.232]. But now also see Lorenzo Per-
rone, “‘I cuori e i reni’: Note sull’interpretazione origeniana di Sal 7,10,” in
Adamantius 22 (2016): 87–104.
116. De oratione 29.2 [GCS 3.382], in explanation of Leviticus 17.11: [ἡ ψυχὴ
τῆς πασὴς σαρκὸς] ἥτις ἐστὶν ὁμονύμως ᾧ ἐγκατοικεῖ σώματι τὸ ἡγεμονικὸν ὃ καλεῖται
καρδία.
117. Origen discusses this in De principiis 3.4.3–4 [GK 612–618].
118. Hom in Ps 36.1.2 [SC 411.68].
119. Hom in Ps 37.1.2 [SC 411.280].
120. Hom in Ps 38.2.8 [SC 411.396].
121. De principiis 3.4.2 [GK 610]; see also De principiis 2.8.4 [GK 396].
122. For Origen’s speculations on the p ­ re-existent state of the soul, one may
 Introduction 29

and informs the theology expressed in the nine Homilies on the

Psalms translated by Rufinus.
The fact that Rufinus follows Origen in characterizing the
explanation of these Psalms as “moral” further indicates that
their teaching is fundamentally about the progress or peda-
gogy of the soul and its healing, instruction, and elevation,
as is evident from the text of all nine homilies. This also re-
flects the intersection of anthropology and Scripture, in that
for Origen the moral sense refers to the “soul” of the text and
corresponds to the ψυχή of the reader.123 Despite modern res-
ervations about the integrity of the “moral” or “psychic” sense
in Origen’s practice,124 the Homilies on the Psalms offer, in fact,
an explicit example in practice (the act of preaching) of dis-
cussion of this very sense (expositio tota moralis est).
It has been the more recent scholarly consensus that while

refer to his treatment in De principiis 2.6–8 [GK 354–398], though not without
consulting the reservations expressed by Edwards, Origen against Plato, 87–114.
There is no indication, even implicit, in the Homilies on the Psalms about the
­pre-existence of souls; rather, they are very much about souls “in the Church”;
on this account of the “moral sense,” see Edwards, Origen against Plato, 136.
123. On this important issue one can consult the seminal work of Henri
de Lubac, History and Spirit: The Understanding of Scripture According to Origen,
trans. Anne Englund Nash (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2007), a more generous
account than that found in R. P. C Hanson, Allegory and Event: A Study of the
Sources and Significance of Origen’s Interpretation of Scripture (Louisville: Westminster
John Knox, 2002). Jean Daniélou, Gospel Message and Hellenistic Culture, trans.
John Austin Baker (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1973), while generally sympa-
thetic to Origen’s exegesis, contends that specifically Christological typology is
the only mode of allegory that is distinctively Christian; other forms of allego-
ry run the risk of becoming flights of fancy. Additionally, the recent studies by
Elizabeth Ann Dively Lauro, The Soul and Spirit of Scripture within Origen’s Exegesis
(Boston: Brill, 2005), and J. Christopher King, Origen on the Song of Songs as the
Spirit of the Scripture (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), both offer helpful
analyses of the two higher senses in Origen.
124. See the helpful summary of recent scholarship in Dively Lauro, 15–26;
her own work seeks to rehabilitate the psychic (moral) sense and offers an analy-
sis of its role—precisely in its correlation with the pneumatic (spiritual) sense—
in Origen’s practice. She shrewdly demonstrates how—in a way reflective of his
anthropology—Origen employs the psychic (moral) analysis precisely to lead to
the pneumatic (spiritual) in a way that becomes mutually ­self-mediating. So too,
in the believer, the soul (and even the body) is to become ordered by and to the
spirit. Cf. Dively Lauro, 238–40.
30 Introduction

in De principiis 4.2.4, Origen enumerates the moral or psychic

meaning, correlated to the soul, as discoverable in the text of
Scripture, in practice the moral or psychic meaning is never
elucidated in itself or in isolation, but only in relation to the
spiritual or pneumatic meaning. Further, the moral element is
­ ot-undisputed views of Hanson or Daniélou,
not at all, in the n
distinctively Christian, but perhaps more akin to Philonic ex-
egesis.125 Moreover, Torjesen, in her analysis of Origen’s treat-
ment of Psalm 37, has suggested that Origen presents merely
the historical sense and does not engage in allegory at all.126
She characterizes his method in these homilies thus: “In
Origen’s hand the exegesis of the historical situation of the
Psalmist becomes simultaneously an exposition of the soul,
the church, and the spiritual life.”127 One should observe that
while her characterization is quite correct, the conclusion she
draws is insufficient to account for what is occurring in Ori-
gen’s preaching. Rather, Origen discovers precisely within the
“historical” the moral meaning of the text. The historical voice
of the Psalmist reveals the moral meaning for the reader or
hearer of the text. Mark Edwards has rightly contended that
for Origen the Incarnation (the reality of the incarnate Word’s
body, soul, and spirit) is the condition of possibility for the
multivalent meaning of the scriptural Word (the Word incar-
nate in the text—body, soul, and spirit). He has also warned
against drawing too fine a distinction between the historical
and the moral meaning of the text, arguing that for Origen
the moral sense addresses precisely the meaning of the text
for one who is in the “body” of the Church, the moral (psy-
chic) meaning being found in the literal (somatic or bodily)
meaning.128

125. Dively Lauro, 22, characterizing the (among themselves still differing)
views of de Lubac, Hanson, and Daniélou.
126. Karen Jo Torjesen, “Origen’s Interpretation of the Psalms,” in Studia
Patristica 17 (1982): 944–58; see also her lengthier study, Hermeneutical Procedure
and Theological Method in Origen’s Exegesis (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1986).
127. Torjesen, “Origen’s Interpretation,” 945.
128. Edwards, Origen against Plato, 136. Cf. also Rolf Gögler, “Inkarnations-
glaube und Bibeltheologie bei Origenes,” in Theologische Quartalschrift 165
(1985): 82–94. One of the intriguing features of Origen’s Comm in Cant (and
 Introduction 31

Elizabeth Dively Lauro has made the convincing case that

what she calls the two “­non-literal” senses, the psychic (mor-
al) and the pneumatic (spiritual), in fact function together in
Origen’s pastoral pedagogy, making the “eternal focus of the
pneumatic sense” accessible by means of the “temporal call
to moral purification.”129 That is, the anagogical is accessed
precisely through the moral, and moral progress renders the
soul more attuned to the Spirit, which is the anthropological
telos in Origen’s system.130 What becomes obvious to the reader
of these homilies (as Rufinus clearly saw, and as Origen him-
self had apparently asserted) is that these Psalms provide an
occasion for a properly moral (psychic) exegesis (expositio tota
moralis est), since within them one discovers the dynamics of
the soul’s healing, instruction, and elevation toward the Spirit
within the community of the Church.131

one that deserves more extensive study) is that he explicitly speaks of the spou-
sal relation sung in the text as expressing the relation “Church to Christ” and
“soul to the Logos”: Spiritalis vero intelligentia, secundum hoc nihilominus quod in
praefatione signavimus, vel de ecclesia ad Christum sub sponsae vel sponsi titulo vel de
animae cum Verbo Dei coniunctione dirigitur (Comm in Cant 1.1.2 [SC 375.176]).
This distinction is maintained elsewhere in his exposition, e.g., at 1.1.4–5 [SC
375.178]; 1.2.23 [SC 375.204]; 1.4.4 [SC 375.222]; 1.5.3 [SC 375.242], though
not merely as a means of distinguishing the ecclesial interpretation (as found in
Hippolytus) from what might be called the psychic (individual) interpretation.
Rather, he seems consciously to avoid expressing the relation as “Church to the
Logos” or “soul to Christ,” perhaps as a means of emphasizing that the soul, “em-
bodied” in the community of the Church, relates to the Logos “embodied” in
the Incarnate Christ. Cf. the peroration of Hom in Cant 1.10 [SC 37bis.98–100],
where the two are elided, and the soul is situated (properly) in the Church: tu
melior es omnibus filiabus, tu sponsa, tu ecclesiastica anima, omnibus animabus quae
non sunt ecclesiasticae.
129. Dively Lauro, 238.
130. Cf. De principiis 3.6.6–9 [GK 658–667].
131. Jean Daniélou, in discussing the typology of Rahab in Origen’s Homi-
lies on Joshua, observes that “Origen gives a moral interpretation, which is the
application to the individual [soul] of what is true first of all of the Church . . .
the microcosm of each soul reproduces the macrocosm of the Church”; in From
Shadows to Reality: Studies in the Biblical Typology of the Fathers, trans. Wulstan Hib-
berd (London: Burns and Oates, 1960), 252–53.
32 Introduction

The Moral Sense in Practice

There are, in fact, a number of instances within these hom-
ilies where the moral meaning is adduced by Origen, usual-
ly as a complement, though occasionally in juxtaposition, to
the literal sense. In Hom in Ps 36.3.6, commenting on Psalm
36.16, Origen notes immediately that for the simple, the literal
meaning has something useful or beneficial to offer: secundum
litteram continuo etiam simplicioribus quibusque utilis admonitio est,
de qua et prius dicendum est.132 Before discoursing on its liter-
al meaning (quid ergo nos doceat littera), he notes that there is
nonetheless a deeper meaning (profundius aliquid), “something
hidden” (quid etiam secreti), also to be pursued. His explanation
of this deeper meaning is moral and is cast in terms of the
believer living within the Church (videas autem unum de eccle-
sia).133 For Origen, the moral meaning is very much about the
dynamics of living as a member of the Church. This approach
is continued in making sense of the very next verse (“the arms
of sinners will be broken”), which he observes makes no sense
if taken literally (secundum litteram), but which is intended,
like many passages of the Scriptures, to arouse the dense and
sleepy to invest themselves further in rising above the letter to
understand the spiritual meaning.134 This “spiritual meaning”
is explained, however, in moral terms. He speaks against the
dangers of pride, excoriates the hesitancy to give alms, and
observes the diabolical opposition to good works, all of which
are presented in terms of the dynamics of communal life. The
next verse, too, Origen notes, is problematic when taken lit-
erally (“the Lord knows the days of those without blemish”).
Uncertain of the possibilities of a literal reckoning, he suggests
that each person “makes” a “day” proper to himself (propriam

132. SC 411.144–146; on the categories simplices or simpliciores in Origen’s

exegesis and preaching, see Gunnar af Hällström, Fides Simpliciorum according to
Origen of Alexandria (Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 1984).
133. SC 411.146.
134. Hom in Ps 36.3.7 [SC 411.152]: Sunt multa in scripturis ita posita, quae
etiam eum qui valde brutus est et stertit, movere possunt, immo cogere ut necesse habeat
littera derelicta ad intellectum conscendere spiritalem.
 Introduction 33

sibi faciat ipse diem),135 through integrity in his relations with

others, by withdrawal from company hostile to the Church,
and through the fraternal charity that is expressed in care for
widows, orphans, and those in distress (quoting James 1.27).
Here again, the meaning is expressed explicitly and almost ex-
clusively within the context of ecclesial life and in very practi-
cal, moral terms.136
Verse 21 of Psalm 36 (“The sinner will borrow and not re-
turn, but the just one shows mercy and lends”) receives similar
explanation. Since there is ample evidence that the wicked do
in fact borrow (at interest) and return, Origen maintains that
this cannot be taken secundum litteram.137 Thus for Origen, the
correct explanation requires a particular mode of understand-
ing relative to the text and the logic inherent in it: si intellegas
quis est qui fenerat et quis est qui accepit fenus et requiras quis est pec-
cator qui non redit pecuniam quam sumpsit, intelleges consequentiam
[probably rendering ἀκολουθίαν] habere quod scriptum est.138 The
“money” of which the Psalm speaks is, for Origen, the content
of sound teaching and preaching, and he contrasts genuine
money, expressive of what has been “borrowed” from the Lord
and, in turn, “loaned” to his congregants, with the counter-
feit coinage produced by heretics. Valentinus, Basilides, and
Marcion are mentioned together, and Origen criticizes them
as fabricating coinage outside the “mint” of the Church (ex-
tra monetam figurata est, quia extra ecclesiam composita est). The
one who repays his loan with interest is the one who “returns”
not only by fidelity to the Word received but also with good
135. Hom in Ps 36.3.9 [SC 411.156–158]: Sed et hoc secundum litteram nescio si
possit consequenter exponi . . . Verum si sacratiorem adhuc sensum in hoc loco perscrutari
volumus. Cf. Hom in Ps 38.1.8 [SC 411.358].
136. Hom in Ps 36.3.9 [SC 411.156–157]: Et si quando abicientes mendacium
loquimur veritatem cum proximo nostro . . . similiter et cum retrahimus nos ab his qui
oderunt fratres et in tenebris ambulant et in dilectione fratrum permanemus . . . sed et cum
iustitiam custodimus et cum visitantes viduas atque orphanos in tribulatione sua, immac-
ulatos nos custodimus ab hoc saeculo immaculatorum nobis ipsis facimus dies.
137. Hom in Ps 36.3.11 [SC 411.168].
138. SC 411.168; for ἀκολουθία (meaning logic, order, sequence, or coher-
ence) as a technical term in ancient literary culture and in Origen’s exegesis, see
Bernhard Neuschäfer, Origenes als Philologe (Basel: Friedrich Reinhardt, 1987),
244–46.
34 Introduction

works.139 Origen then gives concrete examples of how to “hear”

the Word and what it means to “repay with interest”: avoiding
lewd company, avarice, and rapaciousness, and showing mercy
to the weak.140 Once again, it is precisely life in the Church
and the moral obligations to charity incumbent upon its mem-
bers that are discovered in the Psalm.
In Hom in Ps 36.4.3–4, the improbability of the literal sense
(secundum historiam . . . secundum simplicem intellectum) of David’s
words141 in Psalm 36.25–26 (“I was young and have grown old,
and I have not seen the just man abandoned, nor his offspring
seeking bread”), compels Origen to distinguish the several
ages of the “inner man,” and thus he can discuss the dynamics
of moral growth and spiritual maturity, contrasting the diffi-
culties that not infrequently afflict the just individual’s “outer
man,” with the internal stability that is the mark of the spiri-
tually mature “inner man.”142 This, too, is related to life in the
Church, as Origen discusses the various meanings of the term
“presbyter,” explicitly referring to those who hold this office in
the community: rather than merely indicating seniority, the
title is meant to convey internal spiritual maturity.143 Here, too,
the insufficiency of the literal sense prompts Origen to seek
out the Psalm’s teaching in terms of moral progress and matu-
rity, as he had done in the previous homily. Later he reprises
the interpretation he had offered in an earlier homily regard-

139. SC 411.170.
140. SC 411.172: Ad impudica rursum devolveris scorta et effectus peccator . . . ut
cupiditati tuae satisfacias invadis quae aliena sunt . . . Non solum, inquit fenerat iustus,
hoc est non solum praedicat verbum, hoc est non solum docet imperitos, verum etiam
miseratur infirmos.
141. Origen here simply assumes Davidic authorship of the Psalm.
142. SC 411.202–216. This distinction, rooted in Ephesians 3.16, between
the “inner” and the “outer” man is introduced elsewhere in the homilies as well;
cf. Hom in Ps 36.1.4 [SC 411.74–76], Hom in Ps 36.3.4 [SC 411.140], Hom in
Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.186]. It is also employed in the Comm in Cant pr. 2.6 [SC
375.94]. Cf. also Hom in Num 24.2 [SC 461.166–176], where he emphasizes
that it is within this “inner man” that the reformation of the “image” takes place.
143. SC 411.202–204: Unde et nos optare debemus non pro aetate corporis, neque
pro officio presbyterii appellari et seniores, sed pro interioris hominis perfecto sensu et grav-
itate constantiae, sicut et Abraham appellatus est presbyter.
 Introduction 35

ing Psalm 36.21144 and employs it to make sense of Psalm 36.28

(“All day long he shows mercy and lends”). Once again, sound
teaching and the fruit it bears in action are contrasted with
heretical teaching, and the product of the “Lord’s mint” (de
dominica moneta) is presented in opposition to the “wicked and
pernicious funds” garnered from the Evil One (iniquam pecu-
niam et pestiferam et de malo).145
Throughout these homilies, when the literal or historical
sense of the Psalm text is insufficient or problematic, Origen
adduces its moral, and specifically ecclesial, meaning for the
believer.146 As Origen himself had initially suggested in these
homilies,147 the Scriptures are themselves multivalent—some
texts teach profound mysteries transcending speech, others
adumbrate and ultimately disclose the Incarnation and its
meaning, and others are given to the correction and reforma-
tion of life—and, as has been shown, the Psalms that form the
basis of these homilies are to him clearly moral in tenor.

Origen’s Teaching in the

Homilies on the Psalms
Origen, within the course of his Homilies on the Psalms, em-
ploys three principal models of or metaphors for the soul’s
progress, which might be characterized as (a) agonistic / mil-
itary, (b) medicinal / therapeutic, and (c) educational / peda-
gogical. The assumption underlying all three models is that
the Christian life is one of making progress (profectus), and
each metaphor attempts to capture or express this from a dif-
ferent perspective. As these are preached texts, there is no sys-
tematic presentation of these models, but rather they occur as
the text of the Scriptures appears to suggest them to Origen;
further, they are hardly mutually exclusive and occasionally

144. “The sinner will borrow and not return, but the just one shows mercy
and lends,” Hom in Ps 36.3.11 [SC 411.170–174].
145. SC 411.214.
146. This is quite consistent with what Edwards, Origen against Plato, 136,
describes as the significance of the moral sense for Origen.
147. Hom in Ps 36.1.1 [SC 411.50].
36 Introduction

are elided or conflated. One discovers that Origen’s teaching

in these homilies and the theological vision he employs are
quite consistent both with the teaching found in De principiis,
from his Alexandrian career (c. 229–230 AD), and that of his
Commentary on the Canticle, composed at Athens in 245 AD, and
so not long after these homilies were delivered at Caesarea.

The Agonistic / Military Model

The image of the Christian life as an agon (rendering ἀγών)
or certamen (probably rendering ἄθλησις) figures prominently
in Hom in Ps 36.4.148 In explaining Psalm 36.23–24,149 Origen
employs the image of the Christian as one engaged in contest,
a struggle principally with the prince of this world.150 In this
grappling, the just individual might from time to time be tak-
en down, so to speak, but the mark of his justice is that he does
not remain down; he gets up and continues the struggle. It is
the devil who seeks quite literally to supplant the Christian, to
trip him up, inducing a fall (casus).151 Within this discussion,
Origen in a passing remark distinguishes between the just per-
son (iustus homo) and the pure person (purus homo),152 perhaps
anticipating a distinction he later makes between the person
who is still making progress (qui proficit)—while subject to falls
(casus), he maintains his justice through effort and repen-
148. Esp. Hom in Ps 36.4.2 [SC 411.188–200].
149. A Domino gressus hominis diriguntur et viam eius cupiet. Cum ceciderit non
conturbabitur [prosternitur] quia Dominus confirmat manus eius (= “The steps of man
are guided by the Lord, and he will long for his way. When he falls, he will not
be thrown into confusion [remain down], for the Lord strengthens his hands”).
150. In nostro agone, qui est nobis adversum principem huius mundi: Hom in Ps
36.4.2 [SC 411.194], alluding to Ephesians 6.12 and perhaps also to John
12.31. Discussing this agon in De principiis 3.2.5 [GK 578], Origen mixes the
agonistic and athletic metaphors: ita etiam hoc audiendum est, quod apostolus dicit,
quod universis athletis vel militibus Christi conluctatio et certamen est adversum omnia
ista, quae enumerata sunt.
151. SC 411.194; in this context he also employs the verb luctari (= λυγίζω).
152. SC 411.194; there is a possibility (Prinzivalli and Crouzel concur on
this) that purus in this passage simply means “without qualification” or “without
specification”; however, a reasonable case can be made that purus here is being
used synonymously with perfectus at Hom in Ps 38.1.5 [SC 411.346]. The term
homo purus / purus homo is found in Latin literature only later (in the fifth centu-
ry) and used exclusively in reference to Christ’s human nature.
 Introduction 37

tance—and the one who has been made perfect (perfectus).153

Repentance is understood and presented by Origen precisely
in ecclesial terms: it is the one who abandons hope (desperans)
of conversion who remains paralyzed and idled by his sin, and,
like the wife of Lot, being fixed on what lay behind, is mired
in failure, and renders himself incapable of returning to life
in the Church (ad ecclesiam redire).154 Conversion is understood
not as an autonomous or private activity, but only in terms of
the life of the community. One who engages in this struggle
is referred to by Origen as an “athlete of piety and virtue,”155
one whose firmness of purpose (maneat semper immobilis)156 is
subtly juxtaposed to Lot’s wife’s ultimately ­self-imposed intran-
sigence: permansit perfecta statuuncula salis.157 Job, who figures
no fewer than five times in the De oratione, is called by Origen
an “athlete of virtue,” whose two “contests” with the Adversary
Origen distinguishes from the Lord’s, who, like Job, grap-
pled—and conquered—three times.158 In fact, in an earlier
homily, in relation to Paul’s teaching about all things being
made subject to Christ (1 Corinthians 15.28), Origen posits
that the believer’s entire life is like a struggle or contest for
obedience, whether to Christ or to his Adversary, with prayer
and asceticism as requisite in training: Propter ergo videntes quia
omnis vita nostra agonem quendam obaudientiae gerit, sive Christi,
sive huius qui contrarius Christi, conemur per orationis, per eruditio-
nis religiosam institutionem hoc agere.159
Origen, prompted by an image in 2 Timothy 2.5, furthers

153. Cf. Hom in Ps 38.1.5 [SC 411.346].

154. SC 411.192; 196.
155. Athleta pietatis ac virtutis [SC 411.196].
156. SC 411.196.
157. SC 411.192.
158. De oratione 30.2 [GCS 3.394]: νενικημένος δὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ τῆς ἀρετῆς ἀθλητοῦ
ψευδὴς ἀποδείκνυται. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.4.2 [SC 411.198–200], where David, Jere-
miah, Jacob, and the Innocents are brought forth as athletic exemplars.
159. Hom in Ps 36.2.1 [SC 411.98], with eruditio probably rendering ἄσκησις;
here the agonistic and educational (institutio) metaphors are elided. On the
significance of this passage from Paul and the centrality of subjection to Christ
in Origen’s vision of the Christian life, see also Hom in Ps 38.1.8 [SC 411.354]
and De principiis 1.6.2 [GK 216–224]; 3.5.7–8 [GK 636–640]; 3.6.9 [GK 664–
666].
38 Introduction

the metaphor and speaks of the certamen and agon encountered

by believers in terms of their embrace of and adherence to the
Law.160 It is important to note that for Origen, the Law, when
correctly understood in terms of its spiritual meaning and in
light of its genuine telos, Christ,161 does not carry the pejorative
connotations it frequently had in the Pelagian disputes and
even later in the Reformation debates. Origen speaks of the
various classes or groupings of contestants by age in the wres-
tling matches of an athletic competition, namely, children, ad-
olescents, and adults,162 implying both degrees of maturity and
the progressive nature of the struggle;163 this struggle is fur-
ther defined through Ephesians 6.12 again as against the spir-
its opposed to Christ. The variety of “ages” is then explained
by Origen in terms of the distinction between the “inner” and
the “outer” man,164 a distinction he also makes in the prologue
to his Commentary on the Canticle;165 these, of course, refer not to
biological age, but to stages of spiritual maturity.
In Hom in Ps 38.1.5, the theme of the agon and certamen ap-
pear again, in this case in reference to those who might insult
or speak harshly toward the believer. Origen makes use of the
metaphor of a fighter who is being pummeled: the blows them-
selves build endurance, and the one who has been engaged

160. Hom in Ps 36.4.2 [SC 411.196–198].

161. De principiis 4.1.6 [GK 686–688]; cf. the helpful summary of Thom-
as Scheck, “Law,” in The Westminster Handbook to Origen, ed. John A. McGuckin
(Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2004), 138–40.
162. Prinzivalli, Origene, Omelie sui Salmi (1991), here cites Origen’s Hom in
Lev 16.1 [SC 287.262], where these “classes” or ranks of athletic contestants are
distinguished along the same lines: Verbi gratia, si inter pueros quis habeat agonem,
si inter iuvenes, si inter viros, quae per singulos ordines observatio haberi debeat, quid
fieri liceat quidve non liceat, et quae certaminis regulae custodiri, quid etiam post haec
remunerationis mereatur palma vicentis, ipsis nihilominus agonicis legibus cautum est.
Crouzel cites a parallel in Ambrose, perhaps, though not conclusively, derived
from Origen: Enarratio in Psalmum 36.52 [PL 14.992]: Sunt athletae qui vocentur
pueri, ephebi, viri; hoc est παῖδες, ἐφήβοι, πύκται; cf. also De principiis 3.2.3 [GK 570].
163. This parallels closely what Origen has to say about the stages of the
soul’s progress after death; see De principiis 2.11.5–7 [GK 446–454]; Hom in Ps
36.5.1 [SC 411.228–230]; Hom in Ps 38.1.8 [SC 411.354].
164. Hom in Ps 36.4.3 [SC 411.202–204].
165. Comm in Cant pr. 6–9 [SC 375.94–98].
 Introduction 39

in the struggle gradually becomes impervious to the blows.166

In like manner, one who has been well trained, whose endur-
ance has been fortified through an extended or long practice
of meditation (bene instituti sumus et animo longa meditatione rob-
orati) is capable of being unmoved by the blows (in this case,
the insults or abusive words) of one’s opponent (antagonista).
Endurance of this sort engenders a kind of meekness in the
believer that is itself imitative of God, for God has to endure
the insulting language of heretics, the blasphemy of those who
deny Providence,167 and the “accusations” of those who remain
unaware of the depths of God’s wisdom.168 When confronted
by the sinner’s provocation, the just person meditates or focus-
es his energies internally on what God has revealed, and so en-
sures his victory, even though initially such provocation might
take its toll on him: dum ipse haec apud se meditatur, irritatio ei su-
pervenit peccatoris, quae eum conturbet quidem et fatiget, non tamen
vincat.169 Origen then continues by distinguishing one who is
making progress (qui proficit) from one who is already perfect
(perfectus), suggesting how a wound sustained in combat, once
reopened by another blow, is like the individual who is making
progress but not yet perfect: additional blows still have some
effect, but do not necessarily overcome the one who endures
them.170 For Origen, it is precisely the struggle, the contest,
that produces in the believer both endurance in the face of
temptation and the capacity to overcome sin in the future.
The topos of the Christian who must face the opposition of
the sinner recurs in Hom in Ps 38.2.6. Here such conflicts are
presented as a function of divine Providence. Commenting on

166. SC 411.344–348.
167. The denial of Providence is arguably for Origen, as for many of the
Fathers, the most insidious form of atheism.
168. Culpatur ab his qui thesauros sapientiae [cf. Colossians 2.3] eius ignorat,
perhaps referring to those who misconstrue the text of the Scriptures and who
fail to grasp the economy articulated in them.
169. SC 411.346.
170. SC 411.346, and so conflating the agonistic metaphor with the medic-
inal one. Ambrose, at the outset of his Explanatio Psalmorum, at 1.4–8 [CSEL
64.4–7], likewise makes use of both medicinal and agonistic metaphors in de-
scribing the healing and strengthening capacities of the Psalms.
40 Introduction

Psalm 38.10 (Obmutui et non aperui os meum, quia tu es qui fecisti),

Origen explains that God has ordered such struggles precisely
for the benefit of those who believe, as a kind of exercise or
training with a view to the progress that it will both generate
and facilitate: quoniam quidem velut agonem quendam inter nos et
consistentem adversum nos peccatorem describit, quia hoc ipsum in-
dicet fecisse Deum, id est, quod exercitii nostri causa et profectus Deus
fecerit ista certamina.171 Faced with such struggles (agones istos),
the believer is encouraged by the Psalm to recall that these
are providentially ordered exercises in endurance (tu nobis haec
exercitia patientiae praeparasti).172 Far from being accidental, the
various agones or certamina experienced by the believer are
providentially ordered occasions for growth and progress.
Closely related to agonistic metaphors are military ones,
which make use of combat imagery. Origen several times
draws upon the language of Ephesians 6.13–17173 in order
to emphasize the nature of the Christian battle. In Hom in
Ps 36.2.8,174 initiating his peroration with an explanation of
Psalm 36.14,175 Origen contrasts the armaments of the sin-
ner and those with which the believer is fitted. The contrast
is metaphorically controlled by the text of Ephesians: justice
and injustice (breastplates), salvation and perdition (helmets),
preaching the Gospel and the shedding of blood (shoes), faith
and infidelity (shields), the Holy Spirit and evil (swords). Be-
cause the Psalm teaches that “sinners have bent their bow,”
Origen then speaks about different kinds of arrows (sagittae).
Sinners and the just both possess arrows, and by these, Origen
explains, one is to understand “words” (verba). The just person
uses words to reprove the sinner, to call him to repentance.

171. SC 411.388.
172. SC 411.390.
173. διὰ τοῦτο ἀναλάβετε τὴν πανοπλίαν τοῦ θεοῦ ἵνα δυνηθῆτε ἀντιστῆναι ἐν τῇ
ἡμέρᾳ τῇ πονηρᾷ καὶ ἅπαντα κατεργασάμενοι στῆναι (= propterea accipite armaturam
Dei ut possitis resistere in die malo et omnibus perfectis stare).
174. SC 411.118–122.
175. Gladium evaginaverunt peccatores, tetenderunt arcum suum ut deiciant inopem
et pauperem, ut trucident rectos corde (= “Sinners have drawn the sword, they have
bent their bow, to cast down the needy and the poor, that they might murder
the upright of heart”).
 Introduction 41

Conversely, sinners use poisoned words like arrows to pierce

the one who is not armed with the shield of faith, to do him in.
Not only words, but sometimes the actions of sinners function
as fiery darts; those who incite others to lust or anger function
as tela ignita of the Evil One.176
Juxtaposed to the devil’s tela is Christ, who, speaking
through Isaiah,177 presents himself as the chosen arrow (sagitta
electa) for the just, and this fittingly relates Origen’s explana-
tion of sagittae as verba to the fact that Christ is the Word.178
Moses and the apostles, Origen later contends, are, like Christ,
sagittae electae insofar as they speak God’s word for the salva-
tion of the hearer, as can be any just individual or preacher
who provokes his hearers to conversion.179 And because Christ
is the sagitta electa, the words of the Canticle ring quite literally
true: vulnerata caritate ego sum.180 Those who speak words that
provoke to conversion are further specified later as “darts of
reprimand” (correptionis iacula), whose words pierce the very
heart of the listener.181
Origen again speaks about such “fiery darts” in Hom in Ps
37.1.1,182 here within the context of the progressive healing
that takes place for the believer within the community of the
Church.183 With keen psychological insight, Origen observes
that correction of faults often is initially painful, and that fre-
quently the wound’s pain stirs in the one being treated a resis-

176. Hom in Ps 36.3.3 [SC 411.136]: Non solum autem in verbis, sed in factis
diriguntur in nos tela diaboli . . . nonne et hic ignitum iaculum est maligni? Cf. Hom in
Ps 36.3.2 [SC 411.132–134].
177. Is 49.2; later, in Hom in Ps 37.1.2 [SC 411.272], Christ is again under-
stood by Origen as the speaker of this verse of Isaiah: Denique et Salvator ita dixit:
Posuit me sicut sagittam electam et in pharetra sua abscondit me.
178. SC 411.120.
179. Hom in Ps 36.3.3 [SC 411.134], where Antichrist is called sagitta diaboli.
180. Song 2.5; Hom in Ps 36.3.3 [SC 411.134]. Cf. Comm in Cant pr. 2.17 [SC
375.102], telum quoddam et vulnus amoris.
181. Hom in Ps 37.1.2 [SC 411.272].
182. Ignita iacula, SC 411.260–262.
183. SC 411.260: discipuli vero eius [Christi] Petrus vel Paulus sed et prophetae
medici sunt et hi omnes qui post apostolos in ecclesia positi sunt quibusque curando-
rum vulnerum disciplina commissa est, quos voluit Deus in ecclesia sua esse medicos
animarum. Here the military metaphor is elided into the medicinal.
42 Introduction

tance that is against his best interest.184 Thus, he advises, being

fully fitted with the armor of God, the believer protects and
fortifies his “inner man”185 against the tela ignita launched by
the devil.186 One who has been wounded by such darts should
first confess his sin (confiteri peccatum) and then keep the failure
in mind (in memoriam recordari delictum), so as to learn from his
mistake. Both elements, s­ elf-knowledge and confession, seem
important to Origen. He speaks of “confession” elsewhere in
the homilies, almost always in reference to ­self-awareness that
comes from recollection.187 In Hom in Ps 36.1.5, he encour-
ages his listeners to be aware of their evil deeds and, rather
than hiding them, to make them known to the Lord through
confession: per exomologesin.188 This “confession” is spoken of
as “to the Lord” four times in as many lines (revela ea Domino
. . . confessus fueris et revelaveris ei delicta tua . . . si aliqua ei delicta
revelaveris . . . et haec ei revelas) and has a therapeutic effect (sine
dubio sanum te faciet). There is no indication here of “confes-
sion” to another person or to the community. Hom in Ps 37.2.1
184. Hom in Ps 36.3.3 [SC 411.262]: Argui vel corripi est doloris poena, cruciatus
et ita gravis est ut etiam hi qui fideles et religiosi videntur, si forte ut homines aliquando in
delicto aliquo incurrerint et arguantur, indignentur adversus eos qui arguunt et oderint
eos. Corripiunt enim ut emendent.
185. Hom in Ps 37.1.1 [SC 411.262], linking Ephesians 6.13–16 with the
distinction between the “inner” and the “outer” man of which he is fond, and
which reflects his interpretation of Gn 1 and 2 as mediated by Eph 3.16; cf. Hom
in Ps 36.1.4 [SC 411.74–76] on the differences between the “outer” and the
“inner,” including their armature; Hom in Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.186–188], on the
“steps” or progress of the inner man; Hom in Ps 36.4.3 [SC 411.204], on “ages”
of the inner man; cf. also Comm in Cant pr. 2.6 [SC 375.94]; Dial Heracl 15–24
[SC 67.86–102].
186. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.3.3 [SC 411.134] for tela maligni ignita, and De principiis
3.2.4 [GK 576], where they are called ignita iacula.
187. Cf. Hom in Ps 37.1.3 [SC 411.284]: etiam haec [sc. the words of Psalm
37.4] debet dicere qui peccavit et post peccatum peccasse se recordatur; Hom in Ps 38.1.7
[SC 411.352]: quodam conscientiae suae igne succensum ex recordatione delicti, prop-
terea dicebat “Et quis est qui me laetificet, nisi qui contristatur ex me?”; Hom in Ps 38.2.7
[SC 411.392–393]: ostendimus igitur dupliciter hominibus flagella praeparari . . . etiam
cum ex recordatione delicti perurgentis conscientiae stimulis terebramur in corde.
188. SC 411.84, where this self-awareness (si malorum tibi conscius aliquorum
fueris), leading to confession, reflects pure conduct and a clear conscience (pura
est via tua et munda conscientia) and issues forth in the “hope” spoken of in the
Psalm; the term exomologesis is found again at Hom in Ps 37.2.1 [SC 411.302].
 Introduction 43

begins with a discussion of the ideal penitent, whose complete

and candid confession of sin (nolit tegere et occultare maculam
suam) emerges from s­ elf-awareness (memor delicti sui . . . conscius
sit sibi . . . ipse sui accusator exsistat).189 This description of “con-
fession” is rife with both agonistic and medicinal language:
the repentant sinner seeks a cure to restore health to his soul
and does not remain down once fallen.190 Unlike the earlier
instance, however, which emphasized confession to the Lord,
this passage seems to assume the potential embarrassment or
scandal attendant upon such a candid confession and the im-
pact this might have on the penitent. Origen feels the need to
persuade his hearers that slight embarrassment in the present
is far less worrisome than what they will face before the angels
at the resurrection if they fail to confess, and that they should
not fret about the criticisms which might be leveled against
them by others.191 One might infer that here Origen assumes
some kind of public confession, one that would make an indi-
vidual’s failings known to others; hence his concern about em-
barrassment. Later in the same homily, he again draws upon
a medicinal model. Here, the inability or unwillingness to be
forthright is likened to indigestion, which is ultimately suffo-
cating; confession relieves the internal pressure, so to speak.192
Origen encourages his congregants to seek out the best doc-
tor to whom they might confess their sin, one whom they can
trust and who is skilled in mercy and compassion.193 After such

189. SC 411.300–302; cf. Prv 18.17 (LXX): δίκαιος ἑαυτοῦ κατήγορος ἐν

πρωτολογίᾳ; (Vlg): Iustus prior est accusator sui.
190. SC 411.300–302: volentem tamen medelam ac salutem animae reparare . . .
cum lapsis non iaceant . . . et sublevetur post casum suum.
191. SC 411.300–302: Si ergo huiusmodi homo memor delicti sui confiteatur quae
commisit et humana confusione parvipendat eos qui exprobant eum confitentem et notant
vel irrident, ille autem intellegens per hoc veniam sibi dari et in die resurrectionis pro his
quibus nunc confunditur coram hominibus, tunc ante angelos Dei confusionem atque
opprobria evasurum.
192. SC 411.318: Fortassis enim sicut hi qui habent intus inclusam escam indiges-
tam, aut umoris vel phlegmatis stomacho graviter et moleste imminentia, si vomuerint,
relevantur: ita etiam hi qui peccaverunt, si quidem occultant intra se et retinent peccatum,
intrinsecus urgentur et propemodum suffocantur a phlegmate vel umore peccati.
193. Hom in Ps 37.2.6 [SC 411.318]: Tantummodo circumspice diligentius, cui
debeas confiteri peccatum tuum. Proba prius medicum, cui debeas causam languoris
44 Introduction

a consultation, one course of action that might suggest itself

to the doctor seems to be a public confession (in conventu toti-
us ecclesiae exponi debeat et curari), which can, Origen suggests,
provide healing for the penitent and simultaneously edify the
community (ex quo fortassis et ceteri aedificari poterunt et tu ipse fac-
ile sanari). The perils of anachronism and the quality of other
internal evidence prevent attempts to ascertain more precisely
how this confiteri (no doubt originally ἐξομολογεῖν) is to be con-
strued, but suffice it to say that there is reasonable evidence to
infer some form of public penance to which Origen is alluding
in these homilies.194
Agonistic and military metaphors are combined in De prin-
cipiis 3.2.4–7, where Origen employs the language of the agon
as a means of emphasizing the necessity of divine help in
overcoming “thoughts,” cogitationes (probably λογισμοί in the
Greek), which can frequently be an instrument of demonic
temptation.195 While not ruling out the reality of demonic inci-
tamenta,196 Origen emphasizes both human freedom from fate
or demonic compulsion and the reality and nature of God’s
Providence. He refers to believers as athletae and milites who
are engaged in a conluctatio and certamen against the “princi-
palities, powers, and the rulers of the darkness of this world”
enumerated by Paul in Ephesians 6.12.197 He makes clear that
his language is metaphorical,198 and emphasizes that the battle
is spiritual: sed spiritui adversum spiritum pugna est. The devil
will employ “fiery darts” (ignita iacula) to insinuate his various

exponere . . . qui condolendi et conpatiendi noverit disciplinam.

194. This is the verdict found in the classic study of Bernhard Poschmann,
Penance and Anointing of the Sick, trans. Francis Courtney (New York: Herder and
Herder, 1964), esp. 66–70, who cites Hom in Ps 37.1.1; cf. also what is still an
important study, Karl Rahner, Theological Investigations XV: Penance in the Early
Church, trans. Lionel Swain (New York: Crossroad, 1982), esp. 246–328; and
also the study of Ernest Latko, Origen’s Concept of Penance (Quebec: Laval, 1949).
195. GK 574–584; the taxonomy of these λογισμοί will later figure heavily
in the ascetic schema of Evagrius; see Robert Sinkiewicz, Evagrius of Pontus: The
Greek Ascetic Corpus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 66–114.
196. De principiis 3.2.3 [GK 572].
197. De principiis 3.2.5 [GK 578].
198. De principiis 3.2.6 [GK 582]: Nec sane arbitrandum est qui huiuscemodi cer-
tamina corporum robore et palaestricae artis exercitiis peragantur.
 Introduction 45

cogitationes, against which the believer is to make use of the

“shield of faith” recommended by Paul in Ephesians, in lan-
guage encountered repeatedly in the Homilies on the Psalms.199
One particular theme that recurs in Origen’s treatment of
these various agones or certamina facing the believer is the ira
or iracundia incited by demons200 or provoked by sinners. While
a variety of sins and evils that afflict believers is treated in the
course of these homilies, the dangers of wrath and anger seem
to occupy Origen’s interest and pastoral concern more than the
others. In cataloguing the various ways someone may resist sub-
jection to Christ,201 which is constitutive of the Christian voca-
tion, Origen counterposes a number of the ἐπίνοιαι of Christ
with a corresponding vice.202 Iracundia and furor are the oppo-
sites of the spiritus mansuetudinis that one sees in Christ. Later
in the same homily, Origen observes that while some individu-
als are predisposed to particular vices, and others to different
ones, all people struggle with anger; it is characterized as a mor-
bus that is pandemic.203 The kind of peace of which Psalm 36.11
speaks as the source of delight is found in one who controls
his wrath both internally and externally, and the contrast with
meekness is developed with obvious reference to the Beatitudes.
As he begins Hom in Ps 36.3.1, Origen contrasts the “sword of
sinners” (Psalm 36.14) with the “sword of the Spirit” (Ephesians
6.17) operative in the just.204 The former is the instrument of
contention and provocation to anger; if one were to respond
not with mansuetudo, but in like manner with furiosa verba, he
would reveal himself, too, as a sinner. The task that confronts
199. Cf. Eph 6.16; De principiis 3.2.4 [GK 577–578]; cf. above.
200. Cf. De principiis 3.2.6 [GK 582], where the demons are said to incite to
anger, which leads through sadness ultimately to despair: Ipsa vero certaminum
species ita intellegenda est, cum damna, cum pericula, cum obprobria, cum criminationes
excitantur adversum nos, non id agentibus adversariis potestatibus, ut haec tantummodo
patiamur, sed ut per haec vel ad iram multam vel ad nimiam tristitiam, vel ad despera-
tionem ultimam provocemur, vel certe, quod est gravius, conqueri adversum deum fatigati
et victi taediis compellamur, tamquam humanam vitam non aeque iusteque moderantem.
201. 1 Cor 15.28.
202. Hom in Ps 36.2.1 [SC 411.98].
203. Hom in Ps 36.2.3 [SC 411.102].
204. SC 411.126–128. Cf. Hom in Ps 38.1.4–5 [SC 411.338–346], where the
sinner provokes to anger while the just is one who seeks to avoid wrath and rage.
46 Introduction

the believer is slowly and over time to allow the “sword” of sin
to rust and fall apart from desuetude. In the face of criticism—
whether merited or not—and harsh words, the just person will
enact the words of Psalm 37.15, not offering a retort out of an-
ger. Responding with anger induces sadness, a sadness that,
Origen suggests, harms, rather than reforms, the soul.205
In order to emphasize the ultimate insufficiency of human
effort alone in the face of such an onslaught,206 Origen adduc-
es the account of an angel’s “wrestling” with Jacob recorded
in Genesis 32. He wants to avoid reading the text as implying
that Jacob wrestled in opposition to an angel, and so the plain
text luctatus esse cum Iacob [LXX 32.25 = μετ’ αὐτοῦ] (Genesis
32.24) is taken by Origen to mean “wrestled alongside of Ja-
cob” or “in support of Jacob” (against the opposing powers
Paul speaks of in Ephesians 6.12).207 After evaluating the prog-
ress Jacob had made (cognitis profectibus eius), the angel by his
very presence offered him assistance in his struggle (cum ipso
est in agone et iuvat eum in certamine). He also emphasizes that
these agones encountered in the life of the believer occur nei-
ther indiscriminately nor by chance (non utcumque neque for-
tuito) but are ordered and arranged by God in his careful Prov-
idence (diligenti examinatione), in much the same way as one
who arranges a competition seeks to match opponents by age
or class.208 Origen uses this analogy to make substantially the
same point in Hom in Ps 36.4.2.209

205. Hom in Ps 37.2.3 [SC 411.310]: Ex iracundia et indignatione hunc arguo,

volens ei inferre tristitiam, non illam quae “secundum Deum est, quae paenitentiam in
salutem stabilem operatur,” sed tristitiam quae laedat animam, non emendet.
206. The insufficiency of effort alone and the necessity of divine aid are also
emphasized elsewhere; cf. Hom in Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.188]: non sufficit homini vo-
lenti istud iter incedere sola propositi sui voluntas, nisi et Dominus direxerit gressus eius.
For this emphasis on divine assistance, cf. also De principiis 3.1.19 [GK 536] and
3.2.2 [GK 568]. For a treatment of grace in Origen more generally, see Benja-
min Drewery, Origen and the Doctrine of Grace (London: Epworth, 1960).
207. De principiis 3.2.5 [GK 580].
208. Cf. Hom in Ps 38.1.8 [SC 411.354], where Origen suggests a providen-
tial ordering of human life in accord with a particular telos. Cf. also De principiis
3.2.3 [GK 570] and 3.2.7 [GK 584], where Origen makes the distinction be-
tween God’s direct and permissive will.
209. SC 411.196–198.
 Introduction 47

The Medicinal / Therapeutic Model

Another prominent metaphor employed by Origen in his
Homilies on the Psalms is that of healing. The life of the believ-
er is likened to a convalescence in the course of which sins
require the correct cure. Hom in Ps 37.1.1 begins with the ob-
servation that God, in his Providence, has imparted the art of
medicine to humanity to compensate for the fragility of the
human condition;210 further, this art makes use of the produce
of the earth to craft remedies for various maladies.211 Origen
then immediately notes that medical treatment is a metaphor
for the healing of the soul.212 Sin, defined as the soul acting
against its own natural good (cum viderint animam aliquid prae-
ter naturam gerentem), is thus like a disease (aegritudo) or an in-
jury (vulnus).213 Just as from the produce of the earth cures
can be wrought and applied to various physical maladies, so
from the words and precepts of sacred Scripture appropriate
treatments (medicamenta) can be found for the soul. While he
does not make it explicit, on the basis of what he holds else-
where, 214 Origen likely expects his hearers to infer that there
is also a kind of craft or art to this scriptural pharmacology.
Christ is called the “Chief Physician” (archiater = ἀρχιατρός), 215

210. On medicine among the human arts, see De principiis 3.3.2 [GK 588].
211. SC 411.258.
212. Quo nobis tendit ista praefatio? Ad animam sine dubio revocatur [SC
411.258].
213. Cf. Hom in Ps 37.2.1 [SC 411.300], where a believer who is weak is spo-
ken of as searching out a remedy for his sin: Intellege mihi fidelem quidem hominem,
sed tamen infirmum, qui etiam vinci ab aliquo peccato potuerit et propter hoc mugientem
pro delictis sui et omni modo curam vulneris sui sanitatemque requirentem, licet praeven-
tus sit et lapsus, volentem tamen medelam ac salutem animae reparare.
214. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.3.6 [SC 411.148–150], where he defines what it means
to be “rich in every word” (1 Cor 1.6) as a kind of resourcefulness in both know-
ing and applying the sacred text prudentially to the concrete situations of every-
day life. Cf. also his classic statement of the problem facing believers found in
De principiis pr. 2 [GK 84]: Quoniam ergo multi ex his qui Christo se credere profitentur,
non solum in parvis et minimis discordant, verum etiam in magnis et maximis . . . propter
hoc necessarium videtur prius de his singulis certam lineam manifestamque regulam pone-
re, tum deinde etiam de ceteris quaerere.
215. This term is used again in reference to Christ a little later, Hom in Ps
37.1.4 [SC 411.288], as well as in Hom in Luc 13.2 [SC 87.208].
48 Introduction

though this same work has also been entrusted to prophets,

apostles, and those who have taken their place in the life of
the Church (presumably bishops and perhaps presbyters) as
medici animarum.216 Worthy of note is that this healing process
is understood and described by Origen precisely in terms of
ecclesial life (in ecclesia sua).
The words of the sacred text are elsewhere held by Origen
to heal and reform the soul, 217 and the patient is expected to
“adjust his life” in accord with the medicine imparted by scrip-
tural teaching.218 The medicine of divine teaching is necessary
for souls that are sick and weak: Haec infirmae et fragiles animae,
etiamsi non ore proferunt, in corde suo tamen loquuntur . . . et ideo
nobis mandati huius medela succurrit.219 Here, too, this medela is
both conceived of in terms of the apt use of scriptural teach-
ing and shaped by a common hope made possible by a shared
life.220 Origen understands his own task as preacher in terms
of enabling such healing by imparting God’s Word through
preaching. It is the indwelling Word, imparted through sound
teaching and preaching, that transforms the soul of the believ-
er: Ita ut possem secundum gratiam quam ipse a Domino meruissem,
vobis quoque ministrare verbum Dei et serere illud in animabus vestris:
tum deinde ingressus sermo Dei animas vestras et haerens in corde
vestro formaret mentes vestras secundum speciem verbi ipsius.221 In
his Commentary on the Canticle, within a discussion of the spiri-
tual senses, Origen emphasizes the accommodation made by
the Word in healing humankind: he makes himself accessible
to the weak (qui infirmantur) by offering himself to them like
healing herbs ([h]olera).222 The goal of sound preaching, then,

216. SC 411.260.
217. Hom in Ps 36.3.1 [SC 411.128]: Si vero in hac vita contemnimus commo-
nentis nos divinae scripturae verba et curari vel emendari eius correptionibus nolumus,
certum est quia manet nos ignis ille qui praeparatus est peccatoribus.
218. Hom in Ps 36.3.6 [SC 411.150]: vitam suam secundum verbum veritatis eius
quae in scripturis continetur aptare.
219. Hom in Ps 36.2.2 [SC 411.100].
220. SC 411.100: sed recogitare debemus quia praesens saeculum eorum qui est futu-
rae beatitudinis non habent spem.
221. Hom in Ps 36.4.3 [SC 411.210–212].
222. Comm in Cant 1.4.13 [SC 375.228]: Denique his qui ex corruptibili semine
 Introduction 49

is a personal encounter and engagement with the Logos, which

transforms the soul of the hearer.223
In Hom in Ps 37.2.6, Origen likens the effect of unconfessed
sin to indigestion, which causes both pressure and discom-
fort.224 A flesh wound (vulnus) and injury to the eye are also
brought forward as metaphors to describe the effects of sin: in
each case, the correct remedy is to be sought so as to avoid fur-
ther problems.225 Relief is sought—and found—in the commu-
nity of the Church and with the right doctor, one who is versed
in mercy and compassion and who knows precisely what course
of action should be taken.226 The very discomfort of the indi-
gestion, for example, serves to prompt the individual to action
in seeking the right cure, and the “pain” caused by sin should
do the same. Additionally, in the same way that one suffering
from indigestion has neither the appetite nor the capacity for
the food enjoyed by the healthy, so too those who are unfit to
approach but attempt to share in the Eucharist bring only ruin
upon themselves.227
Origen twice uses the image of indigestion in his De prin-
cipiis with a similar import and emphases. The degree of dis-
comfort to the stomach depends largely on the nature of what
is consumed, and so too the conscience (mens ipsa vel conscien-
tia) is provoked to a greater or lesser degree depending upon

regenerantur, rationabile et sine dolo efficitur lac; his vero qui infirmantur in aliquo,
[h]olera se praebet ad hospitalitatis amicitiam et gratiam.
223. Cf. the instructive discussion of the relationship between biblical inter-
pretation and personal transformation in John David Dawson, Christian Figural
Reading and the Fashioning of Identity (Berkeley: University of California Press,
2002), 194–206.
224. SC 411.318.
225. SC 411.320.
226. SC 411.318: Tantummodo circumspice diligentius, cui debeas confiteri pecca-
tum tuum. Proba prius medicum, cui debeas causam languoris exponere . . . qui condo-
lendi et compatiendi noverit disciplinam: ut ita demum si quid ille dixerit, qui se prius et
eruditum medicum ostenderit et misericordem, si quid consilii dederit, facias et sequaris,
si intellexerit et praeviderit talem esse languorem tuum qui in conventu totius ecclesiae
exponi debeat et curari, ex quo fortassis et ceteri aedificari poterunt et tu ipse facile sanari,
multa hoc deliberatione et satis perito medici illius consilio procurandum est.
227. SC 411.320–322: Patiuntur hoc quod febricitantes pati solent, cum sanorum
cibos praesumunt, sibimetipsos inferentes exitium.
50 Introduction

the severity of its sins.228 Honest acknowledgment of one’s sins

obtains relief in the same way as one who suffers from indiges-
tion relieves himself by vomiting forth what is causing the pres-
sure and his discomfort. In the lengthy discussion of free will
that forms the centerpiece of his De principiis, 229 Origen again
uses the metaphor of indigestion (here implied rather than ex-
plicit) to explain sin and its healing. An expert physician will
sometimes delay or extend treatment until the right moment,
rather than settle for a quicker but less certain treatment. God,
whom Origen identifies as ἰατρός, in his Providence (γινώσκων
καὶ . . . προγινώσκων τὰ μέλλοντα) allows the evils hidden within
the individual (τὰ κρύφια τῆς καρδίας) ultimately to be vomited
out (ἐμέσας), though for a time God may allow them to accu-
mulate. Similarly, in dealing with an open wound, a shrewd
physician must in some circumstances not seek to cover it, but
allow it to breathe, so that the infection may drain and not
become gangrenous.230 Sometimes the medicine needed for
health is bitter, especially if it follows on the heels of gluttony:
si enim ad corporis sanitatem pro his vitiis quae per escam potumque
collegimus, necessarium habemus interdum austerioris ac mordacioris
medicamenti curam.231 Some ills can be cured only through ex-
cision with the knife, and, failing that, the last resort for the
physician is sometimes the use of flame, to heal and cauterize.
Elsewhere Origen contends that fire, as Paul knew (1 Corinthi-
ans 3.13), could test and prove one’s mettle, burning off what
is sinful:
Est ergo hoc peccatum etiam unum ex illis quod aedificium deferet ligna,
fenum, stipulam et necesse est huiusmodi materias, sicut scriptum est, per
ignem probari, ita ut permaneamus tamdiu in igne, donec de nobis ligna
iracundiae consumantur et fenum indignationis et stipula verborum, eorum
videlicet quae huiuscemodi vitiis exagitati protulimus.232

228. De principiis 2.10.4 [GK 428–430].

229. De principiis 3.1.13 [GK 506–508]. This longest chapter in the De prin-
cipiis, with its extended discussion of free will and divine Providence, is arguably
the cardinal or pivotal chapter of the work—both structurally and in terms of
the argument.
230. GK 506.
231. GK 432.
232. Hom in Ps 36.2.3 [SC 411.104].
 Introduction 51

The allusive account given by Paul in 1 Corinthians 5.1–5 of

the individual who was cut off from community life because of
πορνεία serves Origen’s purpose in demonstrating the medici-
nal or therapeutic purpose of such a course of action; in fact,
he refers to Paul’s treatment as medicinalis disciplina.233 The
sinner’s willingness both to accept correction and to endure
the requisite punishment demonstrates the genuineness of his
repentance and the presence of charity within him. Later in
the same homily, in an effort to explain Psalm 37.4 (“there is
no health in my flesh”), Origen offers a gloss on Paul’s advice
to the Corinthians: “Hand over one such as this to Satan for
the destruction of the flesh” (1 Corinthians 5.5).234 “Flesh” for
Origen is not a reference to physical life or to the body itself,
but rather the lower element or activity of the soul, a term for
all that drags or attracts the soul away from the spirit and to-
ward the material and transient. Origen insists that it is for the
­well-being of the individual (pro salute eius) that this “handing
over for the destruction of the flesh” take place. He contends
that in the sinner the “flesh” is “alive,” but in the just person
the flesh is “dead.” Because caro (σάρξ) is here understood in
terms of Romans 8.6 (τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκός), the “dying off”
of the flesh means being “dead” to sin.235 So the “destruction”
of the unnamed Corinthian’s “flesh” is expressive of the heal-
ing process entailed in conversion, culminating in his eventual
readmission to community life. Paradoxically, the weakening
of the flesh enhances the life of the spirit: Si vero infirmatur
quidem caro sed redit ad sanitatem suam, id est ut sapiat quae sunt
carnis ac desideret malum, tunc sanitas est in carne, quod utique spir-
itui non est bonum.236 To elucidate this further, Origen draws on
Christ’s words in Matthew 26.41, spiritus quidem promptus est,
caro autem infirma, and offers a rather striking interpretation.
To the degree that the flesh is weak, to that degree the spirit
is ready; elsewhere, in discussing the soul of Christ, Origen

233. Hom in Ps 37.1.1 [SC 411.264].

234. Hom in Ps 37.1.2 [SC 411.278].
235. SC 411.280: Delictum autem semper ex sensu carnis [= ἐκ φρονήματος τῆς
σαρκός] venit.
236. SC 411.280.
52 Introduction

asserts that the soul is the medium between the “ready spirit”
and the “weak flesh.” 237 The “weakening” of Christ’s flesh on
the cross completes the “readying” of his spirit, which is at that
moment “handed over” to the Father.238 Thus by an intrigu-
ing juxtaposition of images, the physical “weakness” of Christ
on the cross becomes instructive of the kind of metaphorical
“weakening” of the flesh that must occur in the life of the be-
liever: Haec autem ille in se describens nostris eruditionibus praebebat
exemplum. Propter nos enim et nobis infirmus est.239 For the believ-
er, this “weakening” is effected through s­ elf-denial (abstinen-
tiam) and ­self-restraint (continentiam).

The Educational / Pedagogical Model

The third metaphor or model used by Origen in the Homilies
on the Psalms for the life of the believer is educational or peda-
gogical. In his treatment of Psalm 37.2 (Domine ne in furore tuo
arguas me neque in ira tua corripias me), Origen tells his hearers
that it is necessary to offer some words on correction, which
often takes the form of a “reprimand” (correptio).240 The con-
text of this discussion is life in the Church, for references to
the role of the bishop as one who rebukes (episcopi arguentis)241

237. De principiis 2.8.4 [GK 396]: Nam cum passionem aliquam vel conturbatio-
nem sui vult indicare, sub nomine animae indicat, cum dicit: “Nunc anima mea turbata
est” et “Tristis est anima mea usque ad mortem” et “Nemo tollit a me animam meam,
sed ego pono eam abs me.” “In manus,” autem “patris commendat” non animam sed
“spiritum,” et cum “carnem” dicat “infirmam,” non dicit animam “promptam” esse sed
“spiritum”; unde videtur quasi medium quiddam esse anima inter carnem infirmam et
spiritum promptum.
238. Hom in Ps 37.1.2 [SC 411.282]: Antequam Salvator noster veniret ad cru-
cem et crucifigeret carnem atque emori eam faceret, antequam perfecte mortificaretur, prius
dixit infirmari carnem suam; et donec infirmabatur quidem caro, spiritum promptum esse
dicebat, cum vero cruci eam tradit et perfecta morte consummat, tunc non iam promptum
spiritum, sed in manibus Patris positum esse testatur.
239. SC 411.282; cf. Dial Heracl 1.7–8 [SC 67.70–74], where Origen is at
pains to emphasize the reality of Christ’s body, soul, and spirit, and his “hand-
ing over” of the spirit to the Father on the cross: the spirit, incapable by nature
of descending at death ad infera, was “deposited” with the Father (ταύτην τὴν
παραθήκην παραθέμενος τῷ πατρί), to be reclaimed at the Resurrection.
240. Hom in Ps 37.1.1 [SC 411.266]: Oportet ergo nos aliqua et de correptione
dicere.
241. SC 411.266.
 Introduction 53

and to bishops, presbyters, and deacons as educating through

verbal reprimand (omnes episcopi atque omnes presbyteri vel diacones
erudiunt nos et erudientes adhibent correptiones et verbis austerioribus
increpant)242 form an inclusio that frames his discussion of the di-
vine pedagogy that shapes the life of the believer. Quoting He-
brews 12.11, Origen remarks that the benefits of correction and
instruction are not immediate, nor are they usually received
with pleasure; however, the l­ong-term benefits outweigh the
immediate discomfort and pain that are inflicted. Correction
and rebuke are exercises intended to engender justice. He then
turns to the example of children, who experience correction
at the hands of pedagogues (paedagogi) and teachers (doctores).
Even if cognizant of the fact that such correction is ultimate-
ly helpful and that genuine progress (profectus) depends upon
such measures, students still bristle at such correction.243 This
is no less true of adults, Origen contends. He then employs lan-
guage found in Galatians 3.24 and 4.2 to discuss the various
types and degrees of correction experienced by the mature:
he speaks of the “steward” (dispensator / actor / οἰκόνομος), the
“tutor” (procurator / ἐπίτροπος), and the “pedagogue” (paedago-
gus / παιδαγωγός).244 This triplet is introduced by Origen imme-
diately after mentioning the instructional and corrective roles
exercised by the threefold order of bishops, priests, and dea-
cons;245 however tempting it may be to infer a more precise cor-
relation between these two sets of three, the text offers nothing
further, and, given what follows, it is unlikely that he intended
such a strict parallelism. What is important, however, is that he
sees the work of instruction and correction as taking place on
two levels or in two modes, as it were: within ecclesial life and
under the tutelage of the angels (with no suggestion that these
are exclusive of each other); this is the real state of affairs (res),
which his comparison (similitudo / exemplum) with the education
of the young is intended to illustrate. Life in the community of
242. SC 411.268.
243. Hom in Ps 37.1.1 [SC 411.266].
244. Hom in Ps 37.1.1 [SC 411.268].
245. Hom in Ps 37.1.1 [SC 411.268]: Si intellexisti similitudinem, transi mihi
ab exemplo ad rem, et intellege de nobis hominibus quae dicuntur. Omnes episcopi atque
omnes presbyteri vel diacones erudiunt nos.
54 Introduction

the Church is understood as educative, and Origen wants his

hearers to understand that this eruditio is carried out both by
the ordained who shepherd the community and by angels who
act as instructors and guides. The roles of steward and tutor,
he suggests, belong to the angels, to whom care for the believ-
er is entrusted: Est autem quando erudimur etiam a procuratoribus
et actoribus, id est ab his angelis quibus creditae sunt dispensandae
et regendae animae nostrae.246 To support this he offers the ex-
ample of the Angel of Repentance (ὁ ἄγγελος τῆς μετανοίας),
who guides, not infrequently chastises, and ultimately tutors
Hermas in the Shepherd.247 In fact, the De principiis indicates
that Origen had elaborated a rather developed angelology.
Within his discussion of the origin and end of created things,
he teaches that, in this age, humans who have not become
totally depraved are entrusted to a kind of angelic manage-
ment, described explicitly as an education: Sciendum tamen est
quosdam eorum, qui ex illo uno principio quod supra diximus, dilap-
si sunt, in tantam indignitatem, ac malitiam se dedisse, ut indigni
habiti sint institutione hac vel eruditione, qua per carnem humanum
genus adiutorio caelestium virtutum instituitur atque eruditur.248 His
understanding in this text is very much tied to his theorizing
about the soul’s origin, a topic he never addresses nor even
approaches in the Homilies on the Psalms. These angels, Origen
suggests, are sometimes referred to in the Scriptures as “princ-
es” or “rulers,” and they are responsible for the management
and instruction of those in this world: Sed et principes et rectores
intellegendi sunt hi qui inferiores et regunt et erudiunt et edocent atque
instituunt ad divina.249
In this tripartite scheme, the Law, understood spiritually,
serves as the pedagogue, and this is based on Origen’s un-
derstanding of Galatians 3.24: Itaque lex paedagogus noster fuit
in Christo. One can infer from his presentation that there is
a kind of hierarchy of guardians, disciplinarians, and educa-

246. SC 411.268.
247. Shepherd of Hermas; see, e.g., Vision 5 (25) [SC 53bis.140–144].
248. De principiis 1.6.3 [GK 224]; cf. 2.9.3 [GK 406]: Sunt etiam quaedam invis-
ibiles virtutes, quibus quae super terram sunt dispensanda commissa sunt.
249. De principiis 2.11.3 [GK 444].
 Introduction 55

tors, beginning with the angelic tutors and stewards, and from
time to time (quoque interdum) progressing for more serious
correction to the pedagogue; throughout his discussion, edu-
cation (eruditio) is understood as primarily about correction by
verbal reprimand (correptio). In De principiis 3.6.8, he speaks of
the Law as a pedagogue, but here more as a propaedeutic for
the fullness of the revelation of God in Christ. In this context,
he draws on the language of Hebrews 10.1 and compares the
Law to the “shadow” of that which was to be revealed in Christ.
Instruction and training in the Law (eruditi ab ea et instituti) in-
creased one’s capacity for the more perfect teaching of Christ
(ut facilius possent post institutionem legis perfectiora quaeque Christi
instituta suscipere);250 and all this in anticipation of the “eternal
gospel” (εὐαγγέλιον αἰώνιον), which will not be superseded.251
Given what Origen teaches in De principiis, the “lex paedagogus
. . . in Christo” of Galatians, evoked in Hom in Ps 37.1.1, is thus
perhaps best understood as intimating the Law’s role in form-
ing and directing the believer toward Christ, who is himself
the Law’s telos, as is made clear at the end of De principiis 3.6.9,
where the ultimate end of this educational and corrective en-
terprise is to make believers fit to receive God himself: id est ut
cum capaces Dei fuerint effecti, sit eis Deus omnia in omnibus.252
Origen emphasizes the distinction, however, between these
preliminary educators (the steward, tutor, and pedagogue)
and the “Head of the Household” (paterfamilias / οἰκοδεσπότης),
to whom ultimate correction belongs. He discusses the in-
creasing severity of punishment, noting that the pedagogue is
more demanding than the steward or tutor, but then equating
the Head of the Household with the very “hand of God” (div-
ina manus).253 Origen then invites his hearers to consider the
deeper meaning (altior intellectus) of these metaphors, which
is that the believer should respond to correction so as not to
provoke divine wrath (ira Dei).254
250. GK 664.
251. On the “eternal gospel,” see De principiis 4.3.3 [GK 770–772] and Comm
in Jn 1.40 [SC 120bis.78–80] and 1.84 [SC 120bis.100].
252. GK 666; cf. 1 Cor 15.28.
253. Hom in Ps 37.1.1 [SC 411.270–272].
254. SC 411.272.
56 Introduction

This divine pedagogy, however, extends beyond the grave.255

In Hom in Ps 36.5.1, Origen refers explicitly to an education or
instruction that will occur in the Kingdom. There is an inten-
tional ambiguity, however, in the language he chooses:
Ultra enim non erit aliquis imperitus in regno Dei, non indocilis per-
manebit, nullus erit a rerum scientia peregrinus . . . ibi iam illuminabitur
perfectioribus disciplinis et ea quae hic studio ac labore quaesita sunt, ad
compendium futurae inibi institutionis accedent.256

The juxtaposition of ibi and hic, as well as the reference to a

disciplina and institutio yet to come, suggests that while there
is a kind of completion or fruition achieved in the Kingdom,
there is simultaneously a continuation of education as well.
The mouth of the just person, it is said, will meditate upon
or “rehearse” (meditabitur— μελετήσει) wisdom (Psalm 36.30);
Origen makes much of the future tense of the verb, finding
in it a reference to the age to come, and he implies that this
Wisdom will become the source of nourishment, a kind of
food. He makes a very similar point in De principiis 2.11.3, 257 in
discussing the fate of those who die “insufficiently instructed”
(minus eruditus), but whose lives are marked by worthy behavior
(probabilia tamen opera detulerit). Origen suggests that they can
continue their education in the heavenly Jerusalem. Further,
he likens Wisdom to a food (cibus / esca) on which they will be
nourished.258 The passage has strongly eucharistic overtones
255. Cf. De principiis 3.1.13 [GK 508], where this ­post-mortem healing is
explicit: θεὸς γὰρ οἰκονομεῖ τὰς ψυχὰς οὐχ ὡς πρὸς τὴν φέρ’ εἰπεῖν πεντεκονταετίαν
τῆς ἐνθάδε ζωῆς, ἀλλ’ ὡς πρὸς τὸν ἀπέραντον αἰῶνα. ἄφθαρτον γὰρ φύσιν πεποίηκε τὴν
νοερὰν καὶ αὐτῷ συγγενῆ καὶ οὐκ ἀποκλείεται ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τῆς ἐνταῦθα ζωῆς ἡ λογικὴ
ψυχὴ τῆς θεραπείας; cf. also the essay of John Anthony McGuckin, “Origen’s Use
of the Psalms in the Treatise On First Principles,” in Meditations of the Heart: The
Psalms in Early Christian Thought and Practice, ed. A. Andreopoulos, A. Casiday,
and C. Harrison (Turnhout: Brepols, 2011), 97–118; McGuckin demonstrates
how, in De principiis, the Psalms are mined by Origen as witnesses to and in
service of a soteriological paideia of the Logos, both pre- and ­post-mortem; this
seems remarkably consistent with what Origen is seeking to accomplish in the
Homilies on the Psalms.
256. SC 411.228.
257. GK 444.
258. See De oratione 27.10 [GCS 3.369–370], where, in explaining the “dai-
ly bread” of the Lord’s Prayer in light of Psalm 77.25 ([LXX], ἄρτον ἀγγέλων
 Introduction 57

(though without explicit reference to the sacrament), as Wis-

dom is spoken of as “preparing her table” (Proverbs 9.2–5) and
the activity that marks this continuing ­post-mortem instruc-
tion is “eating the bread of life,” glossed by Origen as the soul’s
nourishment and enlightenment by Truth and Wisdom.259
In Hom in Ps 38.1.8, in explaining the Psalmist’s entreaty,
“Make known to me, Lord, my end and what is the number of
my days, so that I might know what is lacking in me,” 260 Origen
suggests that, like the human τέχναι, each of which possesses
a particular τέλος, the entire creation is ordered to a particu-
lar end, 261 as is each believer within this larger scheme. As a
child does while learning to speak, one begins by stammering
(balbutiens) and finally achieves the capacity to speak clearly
with age and progress; so one’s life in this age is marked by a
stammering, but will reach its perfection with God in heaven
(consummatur vero et ad summum pervenit in caelestibus apud De-
um).262 Progress is viewed, then, in terms of the telos articulated
in 1 Corinthians 15.24–28—an end achieved only in the age to
come—and begins with a recognition of what is lacking (quid
desit) or imperfect in light of that end. It is this awareness of
what is lacking in the self that is the condition of possibility
for the genuine healing and growth envisioned in his lengthy
account of human freedom that forms the centerpiece of his
De principiis.263

ἔφαγεν ἄνθρωπος = [Vlg] panem angelorum manducavit homo), he notes that both
angels and humans share the “bread” of Wisdom. See also Comm in Cant 1.4.13
[SC 375.228], where this “bread of angels” is called a “small, delicate food” (cf.
Exodus 16.14) offered to those who follow the “pillar and cloud” into “the wil-
derness,” presumably a metaphor for those “making progress.”
259. GK 442–444: Hi vero, qui secundum apostolorum sensum theoriam scriptu-
rarum recipiunt, sperant “manducaturos” quidem esse sanctos, sed “panem vitae,” qui
veritatis et sapientiae cibis nutriat animam et inluminet mentem et potet eam divinae
sapientiae poculis.
260. SC 411.354: Notum fac mihi, Domine, finem meum et numerum dierum meo-
rum qui est ut sciam quid desit mihi, quoting Ps 38.5.
261. That end is here once again supplied by 1 Cor 15.24–28, the subjection
of all things to God in Christ.
262. SC 411.354.
263. De principiis 3.1.12 [GK 504]: Ita et si qui non prius animae suae vitia
et peccatorum suorum cognoverit mala ac proprii oris confessione prodiderit, purgare is
58 Introduction

Quoting Psalm 119.6 (multum enim incola fuit anima mea)

and explaining Psalm 38.5 in terms of the exodus from Egypt
(characterizing the plea as their desire to know where they
were going), Origen then goes on to explain what the text
means by numerum dierum meorum. He offers two ways of un-
derstanding this. The first is rooted in the distinction between
the temporal “day” marked by the sun’s movement across the
sky and (drawing on the dual meaning of caelum) the “second”
and “third” heavens spoken of by Paul in 2 Corinthians 12.2–4,
as representative of different “days,” and a progressive revela-
tion of the truth in each. This is quite similar to his teaching
in De principiis 1.6.3, where he speaks of three “times” (in pri-
mis alii, alii in secundis, nonnulli etiam in ultimis temporibus)264 in
which beings are arranged in accord with their proportionate
perfection, and in 3.6.6, where he discusses the telos of cre-
ation. While not specifying a tripartite progression, here he
emphasizes that the restoration of all things (tunc cum omnia
restituentur) will happen gradually and in varying degrees (pau-
latim et per partes) over a period of endless and immeasurable
ages (infinitis et immensis labentibus saeculis).265 The second pos-
sible interpretation he offers of these “days” is related to Christ
as the Sol iustitiae (cf. Malachi 3.20 LXX), who illumines with
knowledge and truth: the individual who allows this Sun to
shine on his heart experiences this “day,” and the frequency
and regularity of such illumination increase the “number” of
absolvique non poterit, ne ignoret sibi per gratiam concessum esse quod possidet et divinam
liberalitatem proprium bonum putet. Here, this awareness of sin necessarily requires
verbal acknowledgment or “confession.”
264. GK 226. Origen is fond of this threefold division among believers, the
differences among them, however, being not a matter of nature (as in the vari-
ous gnostic systems), but reflecting degrees of progress and healing. He posits
three classes of athletic competitors in Hom in Ps 36.4.2 [SC 411.196–198], and
in Comm in Cant 2.4.4–6 [SC 375.332], the three types of companions men-
tioned in the Canticle, the reginae, the concubinae, and the adulescentulae, are un-
derstood mystically (requiramus intelligentiam mysticam) as referring to believers at
different stages of progress: istae autem omnes differentiae eorum sunt, qui in Christo
credentes diversis ei affectibus sociantur. Cf. also Hom in Num 27 [SC 461.270–346],
the lengthy treatment of Israel’s progress in the desert through various stops or
stations (mansiones).
265. GK 658.
 Introduction 59

those days.266 Similarly, in De principiis 2.11.6, Origen describes

the continuing pedagogy in the life to come as a “school for
souls” (in quodam eruditionis loco et, ut ita dixerim, auditorio vel
schola animarum).267 This pedagogy both involves a greater un-
derstanding of what has already transpired in the life of the
believer (in the light of God’s Providence) and includes a mak-
ing known of what is to come.268

Future Judgment
Origen also addresses the judgment to come (iudicium fu-
turum) in the Homilies on the Psalms. As a matter of faith, aware-
ness of the coming judgment should prompt the believer to
undertake a more careful examination of conscience and rec-
ollection of his sins: Ut mens credens de iudicio futuro, recordatio-
nem delictorum suorum non absque lacrimis et lamentatione recenseat,
cum quis resolutus in lacrimis dicit ad Dominum, “Effundo in con-
spectu tuo orationem meam.”269 Drawing on a distinction he had
made earlier in his De oratione,270 he notes that the “Kingdom of
Heaven” refers to those who are still making progress, while the
“Kingdom of God” refers to those who have reached the end: Et
ut memini me iam saepe dixisse, regnum caelorum est eorum qui adhuc
in profectionibus sunt; regnum vero Dei, eorum qui iam ad perfectum
venerunt finem.271 This distinction is made possible by his convic-
tion that progress (profectus) can continue after death. In Hom
in Ps 36.5.7, in explaining how the Lord is the “protector in time
of trouble” (Psalm 36.39), Origen describes what happens at

266. Hom in Ps 38.1.8 [SC 411.358]. Cf. Comm in Cant 2.4.29 [SC 375.346],
where it is purity of heart that constitutes midday (meridies) in the believer, allow-
ing him to see God; Hom in Ps 36.3.9 [SC 411.156–158], where each believer is
spoken of as “making a day proper to himself.”
267. GK 452.
268. GK 452: De omnibus his, quae in terris viderant, doceantur, indicia quoque
quaedam accipiant etiam de consequentibus et futuris, sicut in hac quoque vita positi
indicia quaedam futurorum.
269. Hom in Ps 38.2.10 [SC 411.400].
270. De oratione 25.1 [GCS 3.357], composed at the request of his patron
Ambrose early in his Caesarean career, c. 233–234 AD, and so likely a decade or
so prior to the delivery of these homilies.
271. Hom in Ps 36.5.7 [SC 411.250]; from the saepe dixisse, one can infer that
this teaching was a regular feature of Origen’s catechetical enterprise.
60 Introduction

death. Many are troubled when they ponder the coming judg-
ment and probe themselves to discover anything that might be
grounds for accusation.272 He speaks of how, at the separation
of the soul from the body (cum anima separatur a corpore), op-
posing powers, whom he qualifies as “sinful demons” (peccatores
daemones), the “spirits of the air” mentioned in Ephesians 2.2,
led by the “prince of this world,” go out to meet it (occurrunt).273
Should they recognize in the soul anything of their own—Ori-
gen offers the examples of greed, wrath, and wanton behavior
generally—they claim their right over that soul, detaining it
and calling it to themselves, ultimately diverting it (presumably
from its progress toward God) to the lot assigned to the sinful.
Even the just, however, Origen contends, can expect to be so
assailed; but the Lord, who is their “protector in time of trou-
ble,” will not allow the demons to overtake or misdirect them.
This, he suggests, is the meaning of the dominical injunction
that the believer pray, “deliver us from evil.” Moreover, beyond
the moment of individual death, the just also must hope for the
Lord to deliver them later on the day of Judgment.274
Origen offers a similar account in Hom in Ps 38.2.2. Explain-
ing the meaning of Psalm 38.7 (Quamquam in imagine ambulet
homo) in light of the Pauline teaching found in 1 Corinthians
15.49 (Sicut portavimus imaginem terreni, ita portemus et imaginem
caelestis), Origen discusses what it means to “bear the image of
the earthly” and to “bear the image of the heavenly.” 275 Both
hostile powers and divine virtue276 produce images in the soul;

272. SC 411.252: Tribulantur enim considerantes tempus iudicii et semetipsos discu-

tientes ne forte aliquid inveniatur in eis quod vocetur ad culpam.
273. Cf. De principiis 2.11.6 [GK 450–452], where this “air” (cf. Eph 2.2 and
1 Thes 4.17) between earth and heaven is the realm of angelic and demonic
activity as well as the “place” of the continued instruction (it is within this discus-
sion of this “air” that he speaks of the schola animarum) that Origen envisions as
necessary for the soul.
274. SC 411.252–254.
275. This “bearing the image” is also treated, but in relation to the interior
and exterior homo, in Comm in Cant pr. 2.16 [SC 375.102]. Cf. De principiis 3.4.2
[GK 604–606], where “earthly” and “heavenly” are spoken of as aspects or ten-
dencies within the soul.
276. It is not entirely clear whether by virtus divina he means “divine power,”
“moral virtue,” or perhaps rather angelic assistance.
 Introduction 61

he even goes so far as to use the language of an image “being

painted” (depingitur) on the soul.277 Yet even among those who
bear the “heavenly” and among those who bear the “earthly”
there is a considerable diversity, a diversity that reflects the in-
dividual’s inclinations (singulae harum imagines quasdam expri-
munt in anima eorum qui se ad receptaculum earum diversis studiis
exhibent). Paul and Timothy, Origen argues, each possessed the
“image of the heavenly,” but in different ways. So too, among
the sinful, the “image of the earthly” impressed upon the soul
varies depending upon the specific inclinations of the indi-
vidual, and so the nature and extent of that “image” is par-
ticular to each, and Origen implies a willed cooperation on
the part of the individual, that is, cooperation with the power
impressing the image. Those who depart this life bearing the
“image of the earthly” will be reduced to nothing in God’s
city (in civitate illa Dei ad nihilum redigetur).278 The “image of
the heavenly,” however, and the various virtues that instantiate
it, are in this life experienced only partially. Origen reminds
his hearers that, as Paul taught, knowledge (scientia) can be
only partial in this life: there is not yet “face to face” (facie ad
faciem) knowing. The “real” and complete experience of the
various virtues (those he enumerates are all also epinoiai of
Christ) is to be had in the life to come: huius quidem mundi vita
et conversatio imaginaria quaedam sit et imago, futura autem non sit
imaginaria sed vera.279 In reference to iustitia (its cognate iustus
is the most common appellation for the believer in these hom-
ilies), Origen notes that believers might walk “in the image of
Justice,” but that they do not yet make progress in Justice facie
ad faciem. It is clear that, in this age, the experience of virtue is
in imagine, while in the age to come, facie ad faciem; moreover,
from Origen’s language, the inference can be drawn that, even
“face to face,” there is progress to be made.280 The limitations
of knowledge, which Origen associates with the human condi-
277. SC 411.382.
278. Hom in Ps 38.2.1 [SC 411.374].
279. Hom in Ps 38.2.2 [SC 411.374].
280. Hom in Ps 38.2.2 [SC 411.374]: Eadem audeo de iustitia Dei dicere, quod in
imagine iustitiae ambulamus et nondum in illa iustitia quae est facie ad faciem incedi-
mus.
62 Introduction

tion in this age, necessitated the economy of the Incarnation:

incapable by its own power to grasp the full, naked, and pure
splendor of Justice, humanity required the divine kenosis eluci-
dated in Philippians 2 in order to grasp Christ as the fullness,
as it were, of all the virtues experienced only partially by the
believer in this age.281

The Epinoiai of Christ

While Christ, the Incarnate Logos, in his work as mediator
between God and the created order, constitutes the “fullness”
of the virtues, the believer nonetheless experiences this full-
ness in a partial or fragmentary way. That is, Christ is custom-
arily encountered or grasped under one or more of the facets
or dimensions of this mediating activity, which Origen calls
ἐπίνοιαι, usually translated as “concepts,” “titles,” or “aspects.”282
Origen provides the foundation for this in De principiis 1.2. He
begins by immediately emphasizing that Christ possessed both
a divine and a human nature, and that the Incarnation is the
pivotal moment in the divine economy (dispensatio, render-
ing οἰκονομία).283 The method he then employs to plumb this

281. Hom in Ps 38.2.2 [SC 411.374–376]: Neque enim capere poterat humana
natura pellibus et carne vestita, ossibus et nervis inserta, nudam ipsam iustitiae sincer-
amque veritatem ferre et tolerare secundum naturae suae potentiam ac virtutem, si quidem
ipse Christus est natura virtutum: ipse enim iustitia, quae humano generi non in plenitu-
dinem splendoris advenit, quia Iesus Christus seipsum exinanivit forma Dei, ut formam
servi acciperet. Here, Christ is spoken of as the natura virtutum; in the Comm in
Cant 1.6.13 [SC 375.256], he is referred to as ipsarum virtutum substantia. It is
possible that natura and substantia are both attempts to render οὐσία or perhaps
even ὑπόστασις; on the relative synonymity of these two terms in Origen’s think-
ing, see Rowan Williams, Arius: Heresy and Tradition (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
2002), 132–33.
282. For a very convenient summary, see Ronald Heine, “Epinoiai,” in The
Westminster Handbook to Origen, ed. John Anthony McGuckin (Louisville: West-
minster John Knox, 2004), 93–95. The most celebrated discussion of the ἐπίνοιαι
is found in the first book of his massive Commentary on John, though, as will be-
come clear, the foundations for it are laid in De principiis, contemporaneous
with, if not composed prior to, the Commentary; both were begun sometime c.
220–230 AD.
283. De principiis 1.2.1 [GK 122]: Primo illud nos scire oportet, quod alia est in
Christo deitatis eius natura, quod est unigenitus filius patris, et alia humana natura,
quam in novissimis temporibus pro dispensatione suscepit.
 Introduction 63

mystery is an extended reflection on the various titles (diver-

sis nominibus) found in the different scriptural texts. Princi-
pal among these, and the first to receive Origen’s attention, is
Wisdom, which he contends must be understood as possessing
individuated existence.284 It is this Wisdom that is the condi-
tion of possibility for human wisdom, as it makes humans wise
by “attaching itself” to the human mind: quae sapientes efficiat,
intellegamus, praebentem se et mentibus inserentem eorum, qui capac-
es virtutum eius atque intelligentiae fiunt.285 Further titles include
Word, Truth, Life, Way, Splendor, and Resurrection, though
this preliminary accounting is hardly exhaustive.286 While Ori-
gen’s central concern in elucidating these various titles is to
demonstrate the special relationship between the Father and
the Son, what is important for present purposes is that these
epinoiai also serve a pedagogical function in the economy of
salvation, slowly and gradually revealing to the soul the full-
ness of the mystery of Christ and simultaneously enabling its
progress in that mystery. For example, as Way he leads to the
Father, as Word he makes accessible and meaningful the hid-
den mysteries of God, and as Splendor he exercises and trains
the internal vision of the rational creature gradually to receive
the fullness of Light.287
Not surprisingly, these epinoiai figure heavily in the Homi-
lies on the Psalms. There are at least eighteen instances in these
homilies where one or more of these epinoiai appear.288 Christ

284. De principiis 1.2.2 [GK 122–124]: Nemo putet aliquid nos insubstantivum
dicere, cum eum “Dei sapientiam” nominamus . . . unigenitum filium Dei sapientiam eius
esse substantialiter subsistentem. Origen is further concerned to demonstrate that
individuated existence does not necessarily imply corporeality or materiality.
285. GK 122.
286. De principiis 1.2.4 [GK 126–128]; others include Light, Door, Justice,
Sanctification, and Redemption, at 1.2.13 [GK 154–156].
287. De principiis 1.2.7 [GK 136–138]: Secundum haec namque, quae superius
exposuimus, quomodo via sit et ducat ad patrem, et quomodo verbum sit arcana sapientiae
ac scientiae mysteria interpretans ac proferens rationabili creaturae . . . consequenter intel-
legere debemus etiam splendoris opus: per splendorem namque quid sit lux ipsa agnoscitur
et sentitur. Qui splendor fragilibus se et infirmis mortalium oculis placidius ac lenius
offerens et paulatim velut edocens et adsuescens claritatem luminis pati.
288. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.1.1 [SC 411.58], Law; 36.1.4 [SC 411.80], Truth,
Wisdom, Justice, Sanctification; 36.1.6 [SC 411.88], Light; 36.2.1 [SC 411.92],
64 Introduction

is presented as Justice repeatedly throughout these hom-

ilies, though this is not surprising given the fact that much
of Origen’s pastoral energy is expended on describing the
life, characteristics, and progress of the just or righteous (ius-
tus / δίκαιος) person, one who is imbued with Justice by partic-
ipating in it. Christ is also the Way, and it is precisely in or on
him that the believer must walk as he progresses.289 By walk-
ing on the Way who is Christ, the believer thus avoids errant
steps either to the left or to the right. Origen suggests that this
might include philosophical inquiry that is without reference
to God.290 He further elaborates what “left” and “right” might
mean in this case: those wandering off to the left include those
heretics who do not read the Scriptures with sensitivity to their
spiritual sense; this may be a less than veiled criticism of the
Marcionites, whose rejection of the Old Testament was the
product of a deficient manner of reading that hindered them
from grasping the deeper meaning of its seeming contradic-
tions or less savory episodes.291 Those who wander off to the
right include those who possess the capacity for spiritual read-
ing, but who fail to hold on to the rule of faith (here regula
veritatis) and thus misunderstand the text; this no doubt refers
to gnostic readings of Scripture.292 It is adherence to Christ as
Way that assists the believer in avoiding these errors.
Justice, Truth, Sanctification, Peace; 36.2.4 [SC 411.108], Hope, Patience, Wis-
dom, Peace, Justice; 36.3.8 [SC 411.154], Word, Wisdom; 36.3.9 [SC 411.158],
Light, Sun of Justice; 36.4.1, three times [SC 411.182; 186; 188], Knowledge,
Wisdom, Word; Power; Way; 36.4.3 [SC 411.210], Wisdom, Knowledge; 36.4.8
[SC 411.218–220], Word, Wisdom, Light; 36.5.1 [SC 411.224], Word, Wisdom;
36.5.4 [SC 411.234], Justice; 36.5.6 [SC 411.246], Equity, Truth, Justice, Life;
38.1.8 [SC 411.358], Sun of Justice; 38.2.3 [SC 411.382–384], Wisdom, Jus-
tice, Sanctification, Hope, Patience, Redemption; 38.2.7 [SC 411.390–392],
Wisdom, Prophet.
289. Hom in Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.186–188].
290. SC 411.188: Ut illi qui in philosophiae eruditione versantur, videntur quidem
iter virtutis incedere, sed quia a Domino non diriguntur gressus eorum, non tenent iter
rectum.
291. Hom in Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.188]: Sed et haeretici nihilominus ingrediuntur
etiam ipsi iter, sed cum scripturas carnaliter, non spiritaliter intellegunt, declinant in
sinistram.
292. Hom in Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.188]: Si vero spiritaliter intellegant, in ipso autem
spiritali intellectu apostolicae non teneant regulam veritatis, decidunt nihilominus et ipsi
 Introduction 65

Word and Wisdom often appear together as epinoiai of

Christ, and this is not surprising, given his predilection for
these two titles in his discussion in De principiis.293 In explain-
ing Psalm 36.30, “the mouth of the just will meditate on wis-
dom,” Origen describes the believer as one who is “always
speaking Christ” (Christum semper loquamini).294 This is not
merely a matter of verbalization. Drawing on Deuteronomy
6.7, the injunction to “speak these things” (loqueris haec)295 in
the circumstances of daily living, including “on the way” (per-
gens in via), Origen can then associate this “speaking” with
life “in Christ.”296 He plays on the various nuances of meditari
(μελετᾶν), and it is clear that he understands the Psalm text not
merely as an activity of mental reflection (which it necessarily
involves), but more deeply an engagement with Christ that is
simultaneously an exercise, a rehearsal, and a practice.
Word and Wisdom are also spoken of by Origen as offering
support and assistance to the believer.297 In explaining Psalm
36.17 (Suffulcit autem iustos Dominus), Origen first notes that
the propensity to fail is common to weak human nature (omnis
autem homo, quantum ad humanam fragilitatem spectat, et infirmus
est et promptus ad lapsum).298 Assistance, however, is available for
those who are alert enough to ask for help: Tantum est ut nos ex-
spergiscamur aliquando et evigilemus, ut si quando per infirmitatem
casus aliquis imminet, deprecemur Dominum ut mittat nobis verbum
suum et sapientiam suam, quae suffulciat casuros et erigat.299 Here
ad dexteram, diabolo, ut ita dixerim, gressus eorum non dirigente, sed detorquente a via
recta. There are three instances in the Hom in Ps when particular heretics or
their followers are explicitly mentioned: 36.2.6 [SC 411.114], Valentinians;
36.3.11 [SC 411.170], Valentinus, Marcion, Basilides; 37.2.8 [SC 411.322],
Marcionites, Valentinians, followers of Basilides. In addition, though not explic-
it, their positions are implied here, at 36.4.1, and at 36.5.5 [SC 411.244–246],
in both instances in reference to inadequate readings of Scripture. Cf. now A.
Le Boulluec, “La polémique contre les hérésies dans les Homélies sur les Psaumes
d’Origène,” in Adamantius 20 (2014): 256–74.
293. De principiis 1.2.2–3 [GK 122–126].
294. Hom in Ps 36.5.1 [SC 411.224].
295. The LXX here employs its customary imperatival future, λαλήσεις.
296. SC 411.224.
297. Hom in Ps 36.3.8 [SC 411.154].
298. SC 411.154.
299. Hom in Ps 36.3.8 [SC 411.154].
66 Introduction

s­ elf-awareness is linked to divine assistance, in this case God’s

Word and Wisdom, which are sent to support and lift up the
one about to fall. While the antecedent of quae might arguably
be simply sapientia, context and sense demand that it refer to
both verbum and sapientia acting jointly; for Origen, in light of
1 Corinthians 1.24, they are univocal terms and epinoiai for
Christ. Further, this kind of correlativity had already been ex-
ploited in the late second century by Theophilus of Antioch.
For Theophilus, God as Physician employs both his Word and
his Wisdom in the art of healing; they are also related to God’s
creative activity and are the source of life.300 Similarly, Irenae-
us spoke of the Son and the Spirit as the two “hands” of God
used in the formation of the human person.301 Here, of course,
Origen is not so much making a distinction within God (as
Irenaeus does between Son and Spirit), but rather employing
his two favored epinoiai to describe God’s action of “reaching
out” (almost as if with “hands”) in Christ to those on the verge
of falling.
Prompted by the text of Psalm 36.37 (Custodi innocentiam et
vide aequitatem), Origen speaks of this aequitas (probably ren-
dering the Greek εὐθύτης, as will become clear below) as being
among the epinoiai of Christ.302 If the believer maintains in-
nocence, which Origen understands to mean offering offense
to no one, and if the believer is attentive and vigilant (semper
intento animo et vigilanti), then he is capable of seeing aequitas.
He makes it clear that “seeing equity” in conjunction with the
other aspects or epinoiai of Christ—he explicitly enumerates
Truth, Justice, and Life—is what it means to see God: Aequi-
tatem ergo in hoc loco sic accipio, sicut veritatem, sicut iustitiam, si-
cut vitam quod Christus est. Haec enim videndo simul etiam Deum
videbimus.303 Origen is convinced that to know God is to know
300. Ad Autolycum 1.7 (ed. Robert M. Grant [Oxford: Clarendon, 1970],
10): τίς ἐστιν ὁ ἰατρός· ὁ θεός, ὁ θεραπεύων καὶ ζωοποίων διὰ τοῦ λόγου καὶ τῆς σοφίας.
ὁ θεὸς διὰ τοῦ λόγου αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς σοφίας ἐποίησε τὰ πάντα. Word and Wisdom are
later spoken of as part of the triad who is God, at 2.15 (ed. Grant, 52): αἱ τρεῖς
ἡμέραι πρὸ τῶν φωστήρων γεγονυῖαι τύποι εἰσὶν τῆς τριάδος, τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ λόγου
καὶ τῆς σοφίας.
301. Adversus haereses 4.20.1 and 5.1.13 [SC 100.626 and 153.26].
302. Hom in Ps 36.5.6 [SC 411.246].
303. SC 411.246.
 Introduction 67

the Son, as he elsewhere makes explicit: it is in understanding

Christ that the Father is made known and revealed.304
In addition to being adduced by Origen in conjunction with
various other epinoiai for grasping the mystery of God, Christ
under the aspect of aequitas is also important for the moral
life. In Comm in Cant 1.6.6–14, he treats Song of Songs 1.4,
aequitas dilexit te. Playing on the semantic relation aequitas–iniq-
uitas, he notes that perfection is constituted by charity, and he
defines aequitas negatively in terms of the absence of iniquity:
caritas autem nihil iniquitatis admittit; ubi autem nihil iniquitatis
est, ibi sine dubio est aequitas.305 Iniquity is understood as disre-
gard for Christ’s commandments, and thus aequitas is essential
in keeping the commandments and so maintaining charity
(love for Christ). For the believer, then, aequitas (εὐθύτης) func-
tions quite literally as a norm or standard (regula directa / direc-
toria), making or keeping straight what is crooked or distorted:
Et ideo regulam quandam directam ponamus esse aequitatem, ut, si quid in
nobis iniquitatis est, hanc adhibentes et superducentes directoriam manda-
torum Dei, si quid in nobis curvum, si quid tortuosum est, ad huius regulae
lineam resecetur, ut possit de nobis dici, “Aequitas dilexit te.” 306

One who lives in accord with aequitas fulfills the words of the
Song of Songs and, by keeping the commandments, indeed
loves Christ.
The epinoiai, then, have at least two distinct yet related func-
tions. Not only do they make Christ known through the var-
ious aspects of his mediation to the created order and thus
ultimately reveal God, but participation in them also furthers
the progress of the believer in living “in Christ,” the telos of the
moral life.307

304. De principiis 1.2.6 [GK 136]: Revelat autem per hoc quod ipse intellegitur.
A quo enim ipse fuerit intellectus, consequenter intellegitur et pater, secundum hoc quod
ipse dixit, “Qui vidit me, vidit et patrem.” Cf. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 4.6.3 [SC
100.442], extant in Latin: Agnitio patris est filii manifestatio.
305. Comm in Cant 1.6.8 [SC 375.254].
306. Comm in Cant 1.6.11 [SC 375.254–256].
307. Cf. Comm in Cant 1.6.14 [SC 375.256], where these epinoiai are said
both to mediate who Christ is and collectively to embrace his fullness: quae utique
omnia et ipse esse et rursum ipsum dicuntur amplecti.
68 Introduction

Conclusion
While several metaphors are employed to describe the life
of the believer, Origen’s teaching in the Homilies on the Psalms
presupposes degrees of progress (gradus profectuum)308 in the
life of the Christian. The agonistic, therapeutic, and pedagog-
ical images employed throughout the Homilies on the Psalms
serve to underline the ongoing struggle, gradual healing, and
progressive education of the soul that mark the believer’s life
in this age; indeed, they may even continue after death. His
teaching in these homilies, as has been demonstrated, is large-
ly consistent with his more speculative teaching in De principiis
and the more elaborate nuptial theology found in the Commen-
tary on the Canticle.
Origen’s interpretation of these Psalms is essentially mor-
al, and this is consistent with his understanding of the “soul”
of the Scriptures. Further, this moral interpretation both as-
sumes and at times makes explicit that progress takes place
and is worked out within the context of the community of be-
lievers, the Church.
­Self-awareness (sui agnitio)309 is an essential prerequisite for

308. Cf. De principiis 1.3.8 [GK 182]: Ita ergo indesinenti erga nos opere patris
et filii et spiritus sancti per singulos quosque profectuum gradus instaurato, vix si forte
aliquando intueri possumus sanctam et beatam vitam; in qua cum post agones multos in
eam perveniri potuerit, ita perdurare debemus, ut nulla umquam nos boni illius satietas
[probably = κόρος] capiat, sed quanto magis de illa beatitudine percipimus, tanto magis
in nobis vel dilatetur eius desiderium vel augeatur, dum semper ardentius et capacius
patrem et filium ac spiritum sanctum vel capimus vel tenemus.
309. This is the expression found in Comm in Cant 2.5.21 [SC 375.366].
Such emphasis on ­self-awareness permeates these homilies; cf., e.g., Hom in
Ps 36.1.3 [SC 411.72]: iubemur . . . considerare eam [animam] diligentius; 36.2.1
[SC 411.98]: si teipsum perscrutari vis et videre si iam subiectus es Deo; 37.2.1 [SC
411.302]: non ergo cogitet de talibus sed cogitet de anima sua; 38.2.2 [SC 411.380]:
scrutari debemus actus nostros et nosmetipsos probare; and expressed negatively, 37.1.1
[SC 411.262]: quod si per negligentiam sui atque animi desidiam incurrerit in pecca-
tum; 37.2.6 [SC 411.320]: quoniam non seipsos diiudicant neque seipsos examinant
nec intellegunt quid est communicare ecclesiae. Cf. also, e.g., Comm in Cant 2.5.7 [SC
375.358]: Videtur ergo mihi duplici modo agnitionem sui capere animam debere, quidve
sit ipsa et qualiter moveatur, id est quid in substantia et quid in affectibus habeat; and
2.5.28 [SC 375.370]: Et quid opus est plura memorare, quibus ex causis semetipsam
 Introduction 69

this progress, and Origen draws continually upon the idiom

provided by the text of Scripture to elucidate the nature of
the Christian vocation. Whether in terms of being “subject
to God in Christ” (1 Corinthians 15.28), “always speaking
Christ” (cf. Psalm 36.30), “the putting to death of the flesh”
(1 Corinthians 5.5), or “walking in the image of the heavenly”
(1 Corinthians 15.49), the person of Christ is central in Ori-
gen’s teaching as the one who, in and through his various epi-
noiai, mediates the believer’s progress and who heals, trains,
and educates the soul in reference to its telos. Assimilation to
the Logos, incarnate in Christ, encountered in and through
the words of Scripture and the sacraments of the Church, is
the proximate telos of Christian living, while the ultimate end
is spoken of by Origen as nothing less than “seeing God.”310
By this Origen understands a deepening awareness of and a
share in God’s life as triune mystery. Moreover, this growing
awareness (agnoscere) of God as triune is itself progressive:311
it begins with recognition of Christ as the Word and Wisdom
of God and continues with the recognition of and faith in
the Holy Spirit. Ultimate vision is the knowledge (scientia) of
the Trinity, expressed metaphorically by Origen as the soul’s
“food,” necessary both for growth and for the maintenance of
life. The soul is nourished eternally on the contemplation (the-
oria) and understanding (intellectus) of God, a telos very much
in accord with the soul’s nature.312

cognoscat anima, ne forte si neglexerit perfecte semetipsam cognoscere, exire iubeatur in

vestigiis gregum et pascere haedos.
310. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.182]: magna ergo est visio, cum puro corde
Deus videtur.
311. Cf. a similar accounting in De principiis 1.2.8 [GK 138–140] and 3.6.9
[GK 664–666], where those who are capable of grasping the Word and Wisdom
of God ultimately are made capable of receiving God, and thus the end becomes
like the beginning, and God will be “all in all.”
312. Hom in Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.182–184]: Magna est visio cum puro corde ver-
bum Dei et sapientia Dei qui est Christus eius agnoscitur. Magna visio est agnoscere et
credere in Spiritum Sanctum. Magna ergo haec visio scientia Trinitatis est. The choice
of verbs is intriguing: agnoscere (implying perception) in reference to Christ,
Incarnate Word and Wisdom, and the addition of credere (perhaps implying faith
in what is not seen) to acceptance of the Spirit. Cf. Comm in Cant 2.5.20 [SC
375.366], where the highest function of knowledge is the recognition of the
70 Introduction

A Note on the Translation

This translation of these nine homilies from the Latin of
Rufinus was undertaken before the discovery of the Munich
Codex, which includes the Greek text of the first four hom-
ilies on Psalm 36. While it would be tempting to seek to re-
vise these four homilies in accord with the newly discovered
Greek text, this was not done for two reasons. First, Joseph
Trigg has now prepared a translation of the entire corpus of
homilies found in the Munich Codex.313 Second, allowing the
Greek text to affect the translation made from Rufinus’s Latin,
while perhaps bringing the text closer to Origen’s Greek—an
obviously worthy aim—would at the same time risk losing the
voice or tonality of Rufinus. Rufinus, for reasons of his own,
selected these nine homilies to translate and, as his Preface in-
dicates, understood them as an ensemble. While it is no doubt
important to discover what Origen said and how he said it, it

Trinity, and its secondary function is the understanding of his creation: Igitur
principale munus scientiae est agnoscere Trinitatem, secundo vero in loco cognoscere crea-
turam eius; and his account of the human telos in De principiis 2.11.7 [GK 456]:
Et ita crescens per singula rationabilis natura, non sicut in carne vel corpore et anima
in hac vita crescebat, sed mente ac sensu aucta ad perfectam scientiam mens iam perfecta
perducitur, nequaquam iam ultra istis carnalibus sensibus impedita, sed intellectualibus
incrementis aucta, semper ad purum et, ut ita dixerim, “facie ad faciem” rerum causas
inspiciens, potiturque perfectione, primo illa, qua in id ascendit, secundo qua permanet,
cibos quibus vescatur habens theoremata et intellectus rerum rationesque causarum. Sicut
enim in hac vita nostra corporea primo in hoc ipsum, quod sumus, corporaliter crescimus,
in prima aetate ciborum sufficientia nobis incrementa praestante, postea vero quam cre-
scendi ad mensuram sui fuerit expleta proceritas, utimur cibis iam non ut crescamus, sed
ut vivamus et conservemur in vita per escas: ita arbitror et mentem etiam cum iam venerit
ad perfectum, vesci tamen et uti propriis et conpetentibus cibis cum ea mensura, cui neque
deesse aliquid debeat neque abundare. In omnibus autem cibus hic intellegendus est theo-
ria et intellectus Dei, habens mensuras proprias et conpetentes huic naturae, quae facta est
et creata; quas mensuras singulos quosque incipientium “videre Deum,” id est intellegere
per puritatem cordis, conpetit observare; earlier at 2.11.5 [GK 448], Origen suggests
that this knowledge of rationes et causae rerum will include an understanding of
the significance of all that has transpired in this age: omnium quae geruntur in
terris manifestius agnosceret rationes.
313. Origen, Homilies on the Psalms: Codex Monacensis Graecus 314, trans. Jo-
seph W. Trigg, Fathers of the Church 141 (Washington, DC: The Catholic Uni-
versity of America Press, 2020).
 Introduction 71

is also important to understand how Rufinus understood what

Origen said and how he chose to communicate it. Thus, be-
cause the temptation has been resisted regularly to consult the
Greek and because the Latin text instead has been the source
of this translation, it is hoped that this translation will help
the reader better to understand these homilies on Rufinus’s
terms, so to speak. Further, a Greek text for the remaining five
homilies in Rufinus’s collection is not extant; for now, Rufinus
is our only source of access to them. Therefore, other than on
a couple of technical points indicated in the notes, the Greek
text was consulted only minimally.
HOMILIES ON PSALMS
36–38
RUFINUS

PREFACE

T H E P R E FAC E OF RU F I N US

Since1 the interpretation of Psalms 36, 37, and 38 is entirely

moral and presents certain principles conducive to a reformed
way of life, it teaches at one moment the path of conversion and
penance, and at another that of purification and progress. So
I have produced a translation into Latin for you, dearest son
Apronianus, of nine short addresses, which the Greeks call hom-
ilies,2 arranging them virtually as a single unit, so that you might
possess in one volume their teaching,3 which is devoted entirely
to improvement and moral progress. Indeed, reading this vol-
ume will be beneficial insofar as an understanding of its plain
teaching may be grasped without much effort on the part of the
reader, and simplicity of life may be taught in clear and straight-
forward language, and less sophisticated minds may be able to
be nurtured—thus making progress accessible not only to men,
but also to devout women. May your sister in Christ,4 my devout
daughter, not be without gratitude for my efforts, should she
experience these as an ongoing challenge to her understanding
due to the difficulty of the subject matter. For the human body
would not have been able to exist composed solely of sinews and
bones, had divine Providence not woven them together with the
softness of flesh and a fullness that is attractive.
1. Text, SC 411.46 [= CCL 20.251]; for the literary background, see Tore
Janson, Latin Prose Prefaces: Studies in Literary Conventions (Stockholm: Almqvist
and Wiksell, 1964); also, Marti, Übersetzer der ­Augustin-Zeit, 204–6.
2. In novem oratiunculis, quas Graeci ὁμιλίας vocant; for a classic discussion of
the developing terminology of preaching in Christian antiquity, see Christine
Mohrmann, “Praedicare–Tractare–Sermo: Essai sur la terminologie de la prédica-
tion chrétienne,” in ­La Maison-Dieu 39 (1954): 97–107.
3. Dictionem; cf. OLD s.v. § 4. In the same sentence, he uses the terms oratiuncu-
la, homilia, and dictio seemingly synonymously, at least in reference to these texts.
4. Presumably Avita, Apronianus’s wife.

75
 ORIGEN
HOMILY 1, PSALM 36 [37]

F I R S T HOM I LY ON P S A L M 3 6 [37 ]

“ N MANY AND various ways God has spoken to our an-

cestors through the prophets.”1 Sometimes he teaches
us ineffable mysteries through the things that he
speaks, and at other times it is about the Savior and his coming
that he instructs us, but from time to time he corrects and
reforms our behavior. For this reason, we will attempt to point
out differences of this kind in each passage of divine Scripture
and to distinguish when there are prophecies and it is speak-
ing of things to come, or when mystical realities are being an-
nounced, or when the passage is moral.
As we begin, then, an explanation of Psalm 36, we discover
that the entire Psalm is moral and that it has been given as a
kind of cure and medicine for the human soul, since it rebukes
our sins and instructs us how to live according to the Law.
But let us now see what kind of starting point the first verse
gives us: Do not, it says, provoke jealousy among the wicked nor envy
those who do evil: for they wither quickly like grass and like green herbs
soon die.2 Through these words it teaches us that there are two
1. Heb 1.1.
2. Ps 36.1. There is a difficulty here in that the LXX employs two cognate
verbs, [μὴ] παραζήλου and [μηδὲ] ζήλου (both active, it should be noted, despite
the claim of J. Lust et al., that the former is middle voice; however, if that were
the case, the ultima should have been printed with a circumflex. Cf. ­Greek-English
Lexicon of the Septuagint, ed. J. Lust, K. Hauspie, E. Eynikel [Stuttgart: Deutsche
Bibelgesellschaft, 2003], 462) respectively, where Rufinus simply uses the con-
struction noli aemulari . . . neque aemulatus fueris (in both cases, a deponent). Crou-
zel and Bresard note the ambivalence and render them as follows: “ne provoque
pas la jalousie . . . ne sois pas jaloux” (SC 411.51). As will become clear below,
however, 1 Corinthians 10.22, where παραζηλοῦμεν is employed (aemulamur in
the Vulgate), offers to Origen the basis for his interpretation of παραζήλου as
“provoke jealousy” in Psalm 36.1. Erasmus was suspicious of Rufinus’s style and

76
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 36 [37] 77

particular things which we ought not to do. First, we should

not provoke jealousy among the wicked; second, we should not
envy those who do evil: for the consequence for one who pro-
vokes jealousy among the wicked is that he withers like the
grass, and that this happens to him quickly, not slowly. The
consequence for one who envies those who do evil is that he
soon dies, like green herbs.
According to the simple, literal understanding, the mean-
ing of “not to provoke jealousy among the wicked” seems to be:
one should not live as a provocateur3 —that is, a leader and
instigator—of evil among the wicked and worst of humanity,
offering to others, as it were, a model of shameful behavior.
But “to envy those who do evil,” means to be an imitator and
learn to act wickedly. This is what is said in each of these: that
you should neither offer a bad example to others nor yourself
follow the bad examples of others.
But in order to discover more fully the inner meaning of
this word, I think it fitting to adduce from the divine Scrip-
tures this word wherever we happen to find it and to compare
spiritual things with what is spiritual.4 In this way, the meaning
of these passages might be made clearer.
It is written in Deuteronomy: “They have excited in me jeal-
ousy for what is no god, they have aroused me to ire through
their idols, and I will lead them to jealousy for what is no peo-

translation, particularly regarding his rendering of παραζήλου; see his Censurae,

Desiderii Erasmi Roterdami Opera Omnia, ed. Jean Leclercq (Lugduni Batavorum,
1703–1704), 8.434.
3. Aemulator; from Rufinus’s use of aemulari; in this context, “provocateur” or
“one who provokes” is preferable to “emulator.”
4. See 1 Cor 2.13; Rufinus makes use of this principle, which is central to
his approach to the sacred text, in his Comm in Cant 3.13.8 [SC 376.62]; see
as well Claude Jenkins, “Origen on 1 Corinthians,” Journal of Theological Studies
9 (1908): 231–47, esp. 240, and the discussion of Daniel Sheerin, “Rhetorical
and Hermeneutic Synkrisis in Patristic Typology,” in Nova et Vetera: Patristic Studies
in Honor of Thomas Patrick Halton, ed. John Petruccione (Washington, DC: The
Catholic University of America Press, 1998), 22–39, esp. 31–33; see also Alberto
Viciano,“Homeron ex Homerou Saphenizein: Principios Hermenéuticos de Teodore-
to de Ciro en su Comentario a las Epístolas Paulinas,” in Scripta Theologica 21
(1989): 13–61.
78 ORIGEN

ple.”5 Where this is said in Latin, “They have led me to jealousy

(in zelum adduxerunt )” and “I will lead them to jealousy (ego in
zelum adducam),” in the Greek text it is the same word that is
said at the beginning of the Psalm, that is, “they have provoked
me, and I will provoke them.” Although the Greek word itself,
παραζήλωσαν, seems to be expressed more clearly in Latin if we
were to say, “they incited me,” nevertheless it is the same word.
Yet in the Apostle it is also written, “Do we provoke the Lord to
jealousy? Are we stronger than he?”6 In some manuscripts, “Do
we incite the Lord?” is written in place of “Do we provoke the
Lord to jealousy?”
From all this evidence, aemulari in aliquem means to incite
or to provoke another. Let us, for instance, use this example:
there are certain immodest and g ­ ood-for-nothing women
who, if they happen to beguile men and entice them into a
clandestine ­love-affair, over time are no longer satisfied with
their hidden wantonness and wish to make known also to the
men’s chaste wives the fact that they are being loved by their
husbands so as to incite their jealousy and disturb them and
wreck others’ families. If you understand the power of this ex-
ample, how a concubine arouses a wife’s jealousy, you should
also grasp what aemulari inter aliquos means: when incitements
to some evil are presented to them.
Finally, since this is the meaning of the passage from
Deuteronomy in which it says, “They have led me to jealou-
sy”—that is, παραζήλωσαν —“for what is no god,” from this
it becomes clearer what is written elsewhere, where it is said
that our God is a jealous God.7 For a husband is customarily
spoken of as jealous of his wife because out of deep concern
he watches carefully over her modesty and does not permit
his wife’s chastity to be defiled. This is why it follows that a
person who sins against God (who is called “ jealous”) incites
and arouses his jealousy. But all these things are to be under-
stood imprecisely8 when referring to God, just like the things

5. Dt 32.21.
6. 1 Cor 10.22.
7. Cf. Ex 20.5.
8. Abusive [= καταχρηστικώτερον ἀκουστέον], “unidiomatically” or “in a
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 36 [37] 79

said regarding the wrath of God or sleep or sadness; what is to

be understood through them is what each one of us deserves
from God on account of our actions. This is why he spoke thus
in Deuteronomy: “They have led me to jealousy for what is no
God and have stirred me through their idols”;9 that is, they
have stirred up jealousy in me because they worship idols. But
what follows? “And I,” it says, “will lead them to jealousy for
what is no people, and I will provoke them to jealousy through
a foolish people.”10
This is why even now the Jews are not moved against the
pagans, against those who worship idols and blaspheme God.
They do not hate them, nor is their ire raised against them;
yet they bear an insatiable hatred toward Christians who have
abandoned idols and turned to God,11 and in this respect at
least—if in no other—the Jews have become like the pagans.
So when you observe the Jews holding the Christian in con-
tempt and plotting against him, understand this as the fulfill-
ment of the prophecy that says, “And I will stir up in them jeal-
ousy against a ­non-people.”12 For we are the “­non-people,” we
few from this city who have come to believe and others from
different cities, and an entire people has been enlisted from
no particular place from the very beginning of the faith.13 For
unlike the nation of the Jews or the nation of the Egyptians,

misapplied way”; Origen makes the same distinction between language used
properly or appropriately (proprie) and inexactly or loosely (abusive) regarding
the term caritas in the Scriptures in his Comm in Cant, pr. 2.33: sciendum est in his
[locis] non proprie sed abusive caritatem nominari [SC 375.114]; also, De principiis
1.2.13 [GK 156], on the “accidental” rather than substantial goodness of creat-
ed things: haec omnia abusive dicuntur. Cf. also Bernhard Neuschäfer, Origenes als
Philologe (Basel: Friedrich Reinhardt, 1987), 222.
9. Dt 32.21.
10. Dt 32.21; Origen also addresses divine “jealousy” in Ex ad Mart 9 [GCS
2.9–10] and De principiis 4.1.4 [GK 680–682].
11. Cf. 1 Thes 1.9.
12. Dt 32.21: Rufinus’s rendering of this passage from Deuteronomy poses
a challenge for the translator, as Rufinus translates it differently each time; the
Greek text as found in the Munich manuscript is consistent throughout [ἐγὼ
παραζηλώσω αὐτοὺς ἐπ’ οὐκ ἔθνει].
13. Qui pauci ex ista civitate credidimus et alii ex alia et nusquam gens integra ab
initio credulitatis videtur assumpta; cf. OLD, s.v. assumo § 8.
80 ORIGEN

the race of Christians is a people that is united and complete,

but gathered from various places and from different nations.14
He therefore says, “I will lead them to be jealous for what is
no people, I will provoke them to jealousy of a foolish peo-
ple.”15 This is why they are provoked against us and hold us in
contempt as a foolish people, calling themselves wise, since,
granted, it was to them that God’s revelation was first entrust-
ed. Yet meditating on the Law of God from youth to old age,
they have not entered into the Law of God.16 But “God has
chosen the foolish things of this world to confound the wise,”17
and thus what was written is fulfilled: “I will provoke them to
jealousy of a foolish people.”18
But what else does the Apostle say: “Do we provoke the Lord
to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?”19 Let us see what this
means. In this passage, he spoke these things while discussing
sacrifices and offerings made to idols. “Do we”—he says—“pro-
voke the Lord to jealousy?” That is, do we incite jealousy in the
Lord when we eat what was offered to idols, just as the Jews
had stirred up his jealousy through their idols? Do we really
wish to do the same? Therefore, he says, “Do we provoke the
Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?” This is what he is
saying: if indeed we, by our strength, stir up jealousy in one
who is weaker, we are easily able to disregard him; but if we
stir up the jealousy of one who is strong, are we not working
toward ­self-destruction? If, then, we eat what has been offered
to idols and stir up the Lord’s jealousy, we provoke against our-
selves the wrath of One who is stronger, and this results in our
own ruin. So when you see a thoroughly wicked person, watch
out and beware lest you stir up his jealousy against you, lest you
carelessly do something to provoke his wickedness.

14. Gens is used throughout this passage, but for the sake of the English it
is rendered variably as “people” or “nation.” The noun “race” here renders the
Latin noun genus.
15. Dt 32.21.
16. Cf. Rom 9.31; as Crouzel notes, one of the ἐπίνοιαι of Christ, SC 411.58,
n. 2.
17. 1 Cor 1.27.
18. Dt 32.21.
19. 1 Cor 10.22.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 36 [37] 81

Let an example clarify what is being said. Blessed David

stirred up resentful Saul to jealousy when he led the army and
slew Goliath and when choruses of young girls and women
walked in procession, singing, “Saul has killed thousands, and
David tens of thousands.” 20 Now if David had done this by de-
sign, he would, in fact, have provoked jealousy in bitter Saul.21
But as it is, this was not done with the intention that choruses
of young girls would go out and sing a song such as this: “Da-
vid has killed tens of thousands, and Saul thousands.”
This is what the Psalm is teaching us. Since the human race
is prone to jealousy22 and is quite easily inclined toward this
vice, take heed lest your actions provoke the wicked to jealousy
of you, either stirring them to plot against you or arousing ha-
tred for you. This is the full meaning of these words, namely,
that you yourself should neither provoke the wicked to jealousy
against you nor emulate the wickedness of another.
How then does a person emulate the wickedness of anoth-
er? Doubtless it is when he engages in the very same behavior.
What I am saying is this: if someone who was once poor be-
comes rich through ­evil-doing, and if his neighbor is in need,
and sees him who rose from the ground up and reached the
pinnacle of wealth, and begins so to rival him so as to grow
rich in the same way through e­ vil-doing, this is what it means
to emulate those who do evil. Moreover, if someone wishes
to rival the person who, through sly sexual affairs or illicit
schemes, forces access to marriages, households, and wealth
that are beyond his position and means, this person has envied
those who do evil. Even more, in the case of those who have,
through various criminal acts or unworthy and illegal cam-
paigning, reached undeserved heights of public office or who
have, through unjust political activity or even bloodied hands,
seized offices of importance that are not their due, if someone,
observing these people, should be inflamed toward a similar
madness, he has envied those who do evil.

20. 1 Sm 18.7.
21. Aemulatus fuisset in malignante Saul: clearly an attempt to link this biblical
passage to the Psalm.
22. Zelotypiam.
82 ORIGEN

2. For this reason, then, we are enlightened by the Lord’s

command 23 that, when the flame of wrongful emulation
singes24 our mind and heart, we should use the words we have
learned and say, “If I ever wish to provoke jealousy among the
wicked or envy those who do evil, see what happens next: for,
it says, they wither quickly like grass and like green herbs soon die.”25
Do you want to be supported further by the authority of
another prophet concerning such warnings? Listen to what
Isaiah, too, declares about all fleshly glory. “All flesh is grass,”
he says, and “all its glory is like the flower of the field.” 26 Do
you now want to see a series of examples of how the glory of
the flesh is but the flower of the field? Look who assumed pow-
er some thirty years ago; see how his empire flourished. But it
immediately began to wither like the flower of the field; then
there was another after him; and then, one after another, lead-
ers and princes and all their honor and glory not only with-
ered like a flower but also like dry dust were blown about by
the wind, and have left not even a trace of themselves behind.27
Others, too, borne up by riches and swollen with honors,
are anxious to be considered either worthy of praise through
their feigned goodness or worthy of hatred through their un-
relenting cruelty. If one among them thinks that such empty
pursuits are enviable, let him go now to the remains of their
corpses (if even these can be found—for there are a consid-
erable number to whom not even this has been granted), and

23. Cf. Ps 18.9.

24. Pulsaverit, rendered here as “singes” for the sake of the metaphor intro-
duced by flamma.
25. Ps 36.2.
26. Is 40.6; “flower of the field” is the ­Douay-Rheims rendering.
27. Crouzel posits that this is a reference to Septimius Severus (193–211
AD), placing the homily c. 241; Harnack had suggested Caracalla (Aurelius
Antoninus), who reigned 211–217 AD, thus making for a slightly later date of
delivery, c. 247; SC 411.64, n. 1. See ­Marie-Josèphe Rondeau, Les commentaires
patristiques du Psautier (IIIe–Ve siècle), 2 vols. (Rome: Institutum Studiorum Ori-
entalium, 1982–1985), 1.53, n. 90. In the light of the Munich Codex and sub-
sequent research, Lorenzo Perrone has suggested Macrinus (217–218), thus
placing the homily even later, 247–248; see “The Dating of the New Homilies on
the Psalms in the Munich Codex: The Ultimate Origen?” in ­Proche-Orient Chrétien
67 (2017): 243–51, at 244.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 36 [37] 83

then he will discover how “all flesh is grass, and all its glory
is like the flower of the field. The grass has withered, and its
flower has fallen.” 28 But the one who neither loves the flow-
ering of the flesh nor lives in a fleshly fashion, but loves the
Word of God and makes progress in it, hear what he has to
hope for: “The Word of the Lord,” it says, “abides forever.”29
But further I do not think that this very saying—they—that
is, the wicked—wither quickly like grass—comparing them to
grass, is without purpose, since certainly there could be some
other substance to which those who act with malice might be
compared. Grass is the food of dumb and irrational animals.
Quite possibly it is because all who are foolish and ignorant
and who live in contradiction to reason and the wisdom of
God follow those who are in the forefront 30 of wickedness and
are said to feed on the life and actions of those men whom
they also obey, and for this reason they are compared to grass.
For no one who is wise follows their example. For, as the wise
person is the one “who hears the words of the Lord and acts
on them,”31 it is he who eats “the bread that comes down
from heaven,”32 and his food is Jesus, because he is nourished
on his words and lives by his commands. 33 In the same way,
too, those who are conspicuous in wickedness become grass
for those who follow their example or who emulate them in
e­ vil-doing.
Moreover, similarities are to be perceived also in green
herbs, to which evildoers are compared because they pass away
swiftly. Nevertheless, we also discover on occasion in the divine
Scriptures vegetables that are the object of praise, the ones
that, at the Apostle’s instruction, the weak are commanded to

28. Is 40.6–7.
29. Is 40.8.
30. Principes; earlier, auctor et dux, at 36.1.1 [SC 411.2].
31. Mt 7.24.
32. Jn 6.33.
33. Cf. Contra Celsum 8.22, where the one making progress is described as
“feeding on the flesh of the Word”: ἐσθίοντα τῆς σαρκὸς τοῦ λόγου [SC 150.224];
in the context of sacrifice in which it is used, the language is arguably eucharis-
tic. In his Hom in Gen 10.3 [SC 7bis.264], the same phrase is used in reference
to hearing the Word in the liturgy: carnes Verbi cotidie sumunt.
84 ORIGEN

eat.34 But there are others that are opposed to these, in refer-
ence to which it is said that water, coming down from above,
feeds the rivers of Egypt like a vegetable garden. 35 Evidently,
the Egyptian is not spoken of as a “tree,” nor is he even called
“vine,” but green herbs that die quickly. Do you want to see
how quickly the Egyptian dies? See what is said about them in
Exodus: “But the Egyptians hastened,” it says; “they shattered
their axles and quickly disappeared under the water.”36 There-
fore, like green herbs they soon die.37
Finally, there is also that wicked man, Ahab, who was pre-
pared to plant vegetables like these in the vineyard of Naboth
the Jezreelite, 38 for which reason Naboth chose death rather
than allow vegetables to be planted in an expropriated vine-
yard of Israel. He acted as a just man, so as not to allow the
expropriation of the vineyard of justice, whose produce, when
mixed in the bowl of wisdom, gladdens the human heart, 39
nor to allow the planting of vegetables of iniquity, which green
quickly but soon dry up.
I therefore think that, in the hearts of us who believe in
the Savior, there is also a kind of vineyard planted, just as it
says, “A vineyard was planted for my beloved in a fertile place
on a crest.”40 But this was said also to those to whom the say-
ing, “I planted you as a complete, true vineyard,”41 was first
given. There is then within us a kind of vineyard out of which
we press the fruit of knowledge (knowledge that gladdens the
human heart)42 by means of the gift of wisdom in the wine-
presses of the Scriptures when we more perfectly and more
joyfully contemplate the mysteries of the divine law. But to us
who are making progress in these pursuits and who are striv-
ing toward spiritual understanding with the vision of an Isra-

34. Cf. Rom 14.2.

35. Cf. Dt 11.10b.
36. Cf. Ex 14.25.
37. Ps 36.2.
38. Cf. 1 Kgs 21.
39. A conflation of images from Prv 9.5 and Ps 103.15.
40. Is 5.1.
41. Jer 2.21.
42. Cf. Ps 103.15.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 36 [37] 85

elite, comes wicked and impious Ahab, the enemy of our vine-
yard, who, against these pursuits of wisdom, stirs up envy,43
initiates discord, contrives deceptions and factions through Je-
zebel—that is, through the wisdom of the flesh44 —and means
to expropriate this vineyard of spiritual understanding and to
plant it with vegetables, that is, so that we understand what
we are reading in a fleshly manner. For indeed, as all glory of
the flesh is vegetables, so the condemnation of the Apostle is
fulfilled in us when he said to the Galatians, “Are you so sense-
less, that while you began with the Spirit you now are finishing
with the flesh?”45
Moreover, as to the fact that there exist in the holy soul
vineyards and fields blessed by the Lord, listen also to Isaac
speaking to his son Jacob: “Behold, the smell of my son is like
the smell of a full field that the Lord has blessed.”46 For it is
to our great advantage that we cultivate the vineyard in our
soul and dig out the winepress of the Scriptures and harvest
the clusters of grapes and press the wine from the vineyard of
Sorek,47 so that we too might say to the Lord, “How splendid
your cup, which intoxicates me!”48
3. After it said that those who do evil die like green herbs
and it proscribed provoking jealousy among the wicked and
43. Invidia.
44. Hoc est per carnalem sapientiam; cf. τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκὸς of Rom 8.6–7.
45. Gal 3.3.
46. Gn 27.27.
47. Cf. Is 5.2; the fertile valley of Sorek, between Ashkelon and Gaza, is men-
tioned as the home of Delilah in Jgs 16.4. Unfortunately, the nine extant homi-
lies of Origen on Judges [SC 389] treat passages in the first seven chapters of the
book and do not mention Sorek. Eusebius identifies Sorek both as a χειμάρρους,
a wadi that is dry in the summer but swells in the winter (cf. the Kidron Valley
of Jn 18.1), as well as a city near Zorah, the birthplace of Samson; see R. Steven
Notley and Zev Safrai, Eusebius, Onomasticon: The Place Names of Divine Scripture,
including the Latin edition of Jerome (Boston: Brill, 2005), 150.
48. Ps 22.5; While Origen’s extant works do not witness his use of the pre-
cise term, on sobria ebrietas (θεία μέθη) see R. P. Lawson, trans., Origen: The Song
of Songs: Commentary and Homilies (Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1957),
346–47, n. 51; also, Hans Lewy, Sobria Ebrietas: Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der
antiken Mystik (Giessen: Verlag von Alfred Töpelmann, 1929), 119–28, who
demonstrates similar ideas in Origen’s works. Ambrose’s later use of the concept
is likely directly from Philo.
86 ORIGEN

imitating evildoers,49 it then tells us what we ought to do. Hope

in the Lord, it says, and do good.50 Holding in contempt all those
things condemned earlier—public office, wealth, all glory of
the flesh, and all the goods of this world—Hope, it says, in the
Lord. But while you hope in the Lord you are not to be idle;
rather, hope in him as you do good.
Let us see what this goodness is. It is one of those fruits
that the Apostle reckons as fruits of the Holy Spirit. “But the
fruits of the Spirit are love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, and
justice.”51 Do good, therefore, as if one were saying to the field,
“Produce this or that fruit.”52 So now it is to you as a hearer of
the divine Scriptures that the divine Word speaks as to a field.
Do good and dwell in the land, and you will be fed with its riches. 53
Do not be like grass, which withers; do not become like green
herbs, which soon die; but hope in the Lord and do good and dwell
in the land.
What is the land in which it commands us to dwell if we
do good? Certainly, if it is referring to this land where we are
now dwelling, then both those who do good and those who do
not do good dwell in this land. The command, then, seems
unnecessary if it is this land that is understood. But let us see if
it is not rather referring to that land about which it is written,
“Another seed fell upon good ground,”54 which bore fruit; now
this “ground” seems to signify the heart and soul of the one
who hears. We are therefore commanded to dwell in this land,
that is, not to wander too far afield, nor to dash haphazardly
near and far, but rather to dwell and abide steadily within the
boundaries of our soul and to examine it quite carefully and
to become its farmer, as Noah was, 55 and to plant a vineyard
in it and to cultivate the ground that is within us, “to break

49. See Ps 36.1–2.

50. Ps 36.3.
51. Gal 5.22.
52. It is not possible to reproduce in English with the same verb all that one
can infer from facere, used throughout this section.
53. Ps 36.3.
54. Lk 8.8; terra, of course, can be rendered both “land” and “ground.”
55. Cf. Gn 9.20.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 36 [37] 87

up anew 56 the fallow ground of our soul and not to sow seed
among thorns”;57 that is, when we cleanse our soul from vices
and cultivate our untilled and rough character toward gentle-
ness in imitation of Christ, only in this way are we at last fed
from the riches of the virtues. For it must never be thought
that we are instructed to seek earthly riches: these we are com-
manded to disregard and to scorn.
It then says, Dwell in the land. That is, always tend to the
field of your soul; remain there permanently and cultivate
your ground, so that when you have begun to abound with
the fruits of justice, then you will be fed with its riches. But what
does “fed with its riches” mean? It means, “whatever a person
has sown, this he will also reap.”58 And “the one who sows in
the flesh will reap corruption from the flesh. But the one who
sows in the spirit reaps eternal life from the spirit.”59 So then, if
you dwell in your land and sow seed in it not with the flesh but
with the spirit, you will be fed with its riches, like those sheep who
are described as being fed in a verdant place, of whom the di-
vine Word says: “He has placed me there in a verdant place.”60
From this it is clear that every one of us prepares a verdant
place within himself in which he is fed by the Lord, when he
cultivates the fields of his soul and, sowing always in the spirit,
progresses toward the joy of spiritual husbandry.
4. Find delight in the Lord, and he will grant you the requests of
your heart.61 It is customary for the divine Scriptures to offer
for consideration two men, and to speak in the same terms
[ὁμώνυμα] about one, drawn from the other, that is, to apply
characteristics of the “outer” man also to the “inner.”62 What
I am saying is this: the outer, bodily man feeds on corruptible
foods and things proper to him. But there is a kind of food
of the inner man of which it is said, “Man lives on every word

56. Innovare.
57. Jer 4.3.
58. Gal 6.7.
59. Gal 6.8.
60. Ps 22.2.
61. Ps 36.4.
62. Cf. 2 Cor 4.16; this is treated as well in the prologue to his Comm in Cant,
pr. 2.6 [SC 375.94].
88 ORIGEN

of God.”63 There is a drink proper to the outer man, and there

is another proper to the inner man. For we drink from the
spiritual rock that follows us,64 and we drink its water, just as
Jesus says, “The one who drinks will never thirst.”65 There is
a clothing for the outer man, and there is one for the inner
man. Indeed, if someone is a sinner, “he clothes himself with
a curse like a garment.”66 But if someone is just, he hears, “Put
on the Lord Jesus Christ,”67 and, “Clothe yourself with heart-
felt mercy, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience.”68 But
why is it necessary to describe in detail how the inner man is
spoken of in the same terms as the outer man? Both the outer
man and the inner man possess armor.69 The one who engages
in battle according to the inner man is clothed in the armor
of God so as to be able to stand against the cunning ploys of
the devil.
But after many examples, let us come to the subject at hand.
Let us see what is meant by the passage, Find delight in the Lord,
and he will grant you the request of your heart. First it must be kept
in mind that what in Latin is “Find delight in the Lord” (delec-
tare in Domino) is, in Greek, “Delight in the Lord” (deliciare in
Domino). For this is what the Greek term κατατρύφησον means.70
For just as, in the case of the outer man, it is possible not only
to make use of foods, but also to enjoy them with delight (and
it is the wealthy especially who make use of delicacies),71 so too
the inner man is capable not only of making use of foods but
also of enjoying them with delight.
I think this happens in this way: if someone hears only the
63. Dt 8.3.
64. Cf. 1 Cor 10.4.
65. Jn 4.14.
66. Ps 108.18.
67. Rom 13.14.
68. Col 3.12.
69. Cf. Eph 6.13.
70. Rufinus is fond of distinguishing in meaning delectare and deliciare (here
both used in the imperative; later, Hom in Ps 36.2.6 [SC 411.114–116], in the
future tense, delectabuntur and deliciabuntur); I have attempted to capture a slight
difference by using “find delight” and “delight,” respectively.
71. Deliciis perfrui (contrasted with cibis uti); the various senses in which this
construct is used in the following paragraph require a paraphrastic translation.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 36 [37] 89

words that summon him to the fear of God, this man receives
only food from this kind of word. But the one who makes an
effort to understand the Law, to examine carefully the proph-
ets, to make sense of the parables in the Gospel, to clarify the
meaning of the words of the apostles, he who directs his ef-
forts toward knowledge and understanding of all these, he is
one who enjoys them with delight. For he is making use of the
food of the commandments not solely for the purpose of sus-
taining his life, but he finds delight in the full attainment of
knowledge.
This is what I think is meant in that passage where God is
said to have planted in the beginning a paradise of delight,72
in which we were doubtless to enjoy spiritual delights. But also
in another place it says: “You will give to them”—that is, to the
saints—“a cup brimming with delights.” 73 Yet I am also aware
that “brimming with your pleasure (voluptatis tuae)” is usu-
ally found here in the Latin manuscripts, but the Greek has
τρυφῆς, that is, “with delights (deliciarum).”
But further, to the saints and those for whom contempt for
bodily foods is prescribed, the hope of spiritual delights is
promised in return. Do you also want to receive the authorita-
tive witness of the divine Scriptures? There was a certain rich
man and Lazarus, who was poor. The rich man abounded in
delights of the body; Lazarus was worn out by starvation. Both
departed this life, and Lazarus was carried up by the angels to
the bosom of Abraham that he might rest in the delights there;
but the former, who had enjoyed the delights of the body, went
off, as it is written in the Gospel, to fiery Gehenna, and he
heard from Abraham: “You obtained good things in your
life”—that is, you misused delights—“and Lazarus, bad. Now,
however, he rests here, but you are in torment.”74 No one is ca-
pable of possessing delights both in the flesh and in the spirit.
But if one delights in the flesh, as that rich man did, he will
be deprived of Abraham’s lap and its delights. But the one who

72. Cf. Gn 2.8.

73. Ps 35.9.
74. Lk 16.25.
90 ORIGEN

eats the bread of affliction75 in this present life, as that poor

man did, when he departs from here, will experience delight.
Therefore, Delight in the Lord, and he will grant you the request
of your heart.76 But if you wish to contemplate still more ful-
ly how one will delight in the Lord, observe that the Lord is
Truth,77 and that he is Wisdom,78 and that he is Justice, and
that he is Holiness.79 So if you abound in the wealth of Truth,
if you abound in the understanding of Wisdom, if you are
overflowing with works of Justice, then you will delight fully
and completely in the Lord. And when you fulfill this, then
you will also attain what follows: for the Lord will grant you the
requests of your heart.80
Nevertheless, it was necessary to add requests of your heart,
although it could have said simply “your requests.” But what is
said can be understood quite easily if one imagines a kind of
personality proper to each of the parts of the body. For exam-
ple, if the eye had a voice, would it not say, “I seek light, so that
I might look upon things the sight of which brings me delight;
for I avoid looking at anything awful and everything which dis-
tresses or saddens my vision”? Similarly, if the sense of hear-
ing had a voice, would it not say, “I desire a sound composed
with musical artistry, a sound that brings delight, but I avoid
listening to anything caustic or dreadful”? So, too, if speech
were granted to the sense of taste or of touch, all these senses
of ours would without doubt also seek the things agreeable to
their own sense.
Let us pass from these senses to the heart, in which exists
the mind and the governing intellect,81 and let us see what

75. Cf. Dt 16.3.

76. Ps 36.4; here Rufinus employs deliciare in place of delectare used initially
in quoting the Psalm.
77. Cf. Jn 14.6.
78. Cf. 1 Cor 24.30.
79. Cf. 1 Cor 1.30.
80. Ps 36.4.
81. Principalis intellectus, the probable equivalent of the Greek τὸ ἡγεμονικόν,
the higher of the two activities of the soul; cf. the summary discussion of Crou-
zel, Origen, trans. A. S. Worrall (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1989), 88–89.
Elsewhere the term will be rendered principale cordis, e.g., in Rufinus’s translation
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 36 [37] 91

the heart desires and requests, just as we have shown above

concerning the eye, the ears, and the other senses. Without a
doubt, the heart, in accord with its own nature, seeks under-
standing. As the eye seeks vision, so the heart searches for un-
derstanding. As the ear desires a pleasing sound, so the heart
finds delight in wise conceptions. As the sense of taste finds
joy in sweet flavor, so the heart finds joy in prudent thoughts.
As the sense of smell is gladdened by a pleasant fragrance, so
the heart is gladdened by rational endeavors. As the sense of
touch finds delight in what is smooth and soft, so the heart
finds delight in the best and most beneficial counsels. If, then,
you delight in the Lord and thoroughly enjoy the abundance
of wisdom and truth and justice and their delights, the Lord
will grant you the requests of your heart, requests oriented to the
delights just described.
5. After this, it says, Reveal your way to the Lord; hope in him,
and he will act.82 “Everyone who does evil hates the light and
does not come to the light lest his works be criticized. The one
who does the truth, he comes to the light.”83 Since, then, the
one who does evil hates the light, he also, to the degree he
can, covers up and conceals his path, hiding his wicked deeds
and, fearful of being accused, cloaking them in order to mask
them. For example, if one of you—though I would hope that
there is no one of this sort in this congregation—nevertheless,
if one among you (whether a catechumen or even someone
from among the many faithful) is aware that he has fornicated
and hides the sin, does it not seem to you that this person is
hiding and covering up the path that he is taking?
The one, however, who lives chastely and who has confi-
dence concerning the purity of his own life does not wish to
cover up his way, but desires that it be manifest; when I say
“manifest,” I mean to God, not to human beings (lest perhaps
he receive his reward from humans).84 This is the reason, there-

of the Comm in Cant 1.2.3; 6; 7 [SC 375.192; 194] and in Jerome’s translation of
Origen’s Hom in Ez 3 [PL 25.714C].
82. Ps 36.5.
83. Jn 3.20–21.
84. Cf. Mt 6.2–6.
92 ORIGEN

fore, why it is said: Reveal your way to the Lord. But even if you
are aware of some evils, do not hide them, but through confes-
sion85 reveal them to the Lord and hope in him, and he will act. That
is, when you confess your sins and reveal your faults to him,
hope in him because you can win forgiveness from him and
he will act. What will he do? Without doubt he will make you
whole.86 He will say to you, “Behold, you have been made whole;
sin no more, lest something worse befall you.”87 He will do this,
if you reveal some of your faults to him.88 Indeed, if your path is
pure and your conscience is clean and you reveal these things
to him, hope in him.
6. Learn what he does from what then follows: he will bring
forth your justice like a light and your judgment like the midday.89
God brings forth your justice, which you have carried out in
secret90 and have revealed only to God, like a light, and pres-
ents you to heaven and earth as a just person enlightened by
the Sun of Justice;91 he shows the light of your justice to all who
are in heaven, and he takes pride in you, so to speak, as a son,92
as one who has received the spirit of adoption.93 Thus, he brings
forth your justice like a light, for the one who is just in accord with
the Lord’s command carries out his deeds of justice exactly
as the Lord himself commanded: “But you, when you carry
out your deeds of justice, do not let your left hand know what
your right is doing.” 94 Therefore, justice such as this, which is
carried out not to be shown to human beings nor to pursue
human glory, but which is done instead in secret—and which
the Father, who sees in secret,95 will reward openly in his own
85. Sed per exomologesin [=ἀλλὰ δι’ ἐξομολογήσεως].
86. Sanus.
87. Jn 5.14.
88. Haec faciet, si aliqua ei delicta revelaveris; as above, SC 411.84: si malorum tibi
conscius aliquorum fueris; alternately, taking aliqua adverbially, “if you reveal your
faults to him in some way.”
89. Ps 36.6.
90. Cf. Mt 6.4.
91. Cf. Mal 3.20.
92. Iactabit se de te tamquam de filio; cf OLD s.v. iacto, § 13.
93. Cf. Rom 8.15.
94. Cf. Mt 6.3.
95. Cf. Mt 6.4.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 36 [37] 93

time—is brought forth by God like a light and your judgment

like the midday.
All judgments whatsoever, then, which the just person
makes will be not only like light but like the midday light,
which is certainly clearest and brightest. For indeed the full-
ness of light is indicated by midday. If, then, you are just and
good, God will bring forth your justice like a light and your judg-
ment like the midday. And assuredly at the judgment, when your
case is considered, God will make the justice of your case man-
ifest like the light, and the judgment that he renders he will
also make as clear as at midday.
Aware, then, of what is thus to come, let us entreat the
mercy of God, that he may grant us to be among those who
are found worthy, and that God himself may bring forth the
light of our justice and our judgment, clear and bright like
the midday, for he possesses in himself the True Light,96 our
Lord himself, “to whom are glory and power forever and ever.
Amen.”97

96. Cf. Jn 1.9.

97. 1 Pt 4.11. On the doxologies with which Origen concludes his homilies,
see Henri Crouzel, “Les doxologies finales des homélies d’Origène selon le texte
grec et les versions latines,” Augustinianum 20 (1980): 95–107.
HOMILY 2, PSALM 36 [37]

S EC ON D HOM I LY ON P S A L M 3 6 [37 ]

EEING THAT the command admonishes us and says,

Be subject to the Lord,1 it seems necessary to investigate
what it means to be subject to the Lord and what it
means not to be subject to the Lord. For just as “Not everyone
who says, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but
the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven,” 2 so
too not everyone who claims to be subject to the Lord is sub-
ject to him, but the one who has made himself subject3 in fact
and deed. For the act of subjecting oneself, not the claim that
one has done so, reveals that one is truly subject to the Lord.
What we are saying is better understood in this way: Our
Lord Jesus Christ is Justice.4 Therefore, no one who acts un-
justly is subject to Christ, who is Justice. Christ is Truth. 5 No
liar, whether he lies in deed or in teaching, is subject to Christ,
who is Truth. Our Lord Jesus Christ is Holiness.6 No one,
when defiled and impure, is subject to Holiness. Our Lord Je-
sus Christ is Peace.7 No one who is quarrelsome and factious
is subject to Christ, who is Peace; but rather, the one who says,
“I was at peace with those who have hated peace,” is subject to
him.8 This is why in another Psalm also, the prophet says to

1. Ps 36.7. The text of the Psalm quoted here employs subditus (also found
in the Vulgate iuxta LXX), but Rufinus prefers subiectus and its cognate subiectio
in explaining the text.
2. Mt 7.21.
3. Taking subiectus est as a medial passive.
4. Cf. 1 Cor 1.30.
5. Cf. Jn 14.6.
6. Cf. 1 Cor 1.30.
7. Cf. Eph 2.14.
8. Ps 119.7.

94
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 36 [37] 95

his soul, “Nevertheless be subject to God, my soul, for from

him comes my patience.”9
But the Apostle also indicates great, indeed, and spiritual
realities concerning this “being made subject” when he says,
“When all things have been made subject to him, then the Son
himself will be made subject to him who has made all things
subject to himself.”10 Listen to what he is saying: it is neces-
sary that all things be made subject to Christ and that then
he himself be made subject by a subjection that is, of course,
appropriately understood as having been effected by the Spir-
it.11 In the meantime, it is necessary that all things be made
subject to Christ so that, when at last all things have been
fulfilled and brought to completion through subjection, he
too (as though bringing back this [subjection] as the palm of
his victory) may eventually be described as made subject to the
Father. But unless this is understood spiritually, it is held to
mean surely something impious to those who are not atten-
tive. For it should not be thought that the Son of God is not at
all now subject to the Father, but that in the end times, when
all things have been made subject to him [the Son], he will
then himself also be made subject. On the contrary, because
he makes his own everything belonging to us12 and says that it
is he who hungers in us, and that it is he who thirsts in us, and
that it is he who is naked and sick, that he is the stranger and
the imprisoned, and asserts that whatever is done to one of his
disciples has been done to him,13 logically and appropriately,
then, does he attest that he has been made subject when each
of us is fully and perfectly subject to God, such that he shows
himself to be in no way whatsoever disobedient.14
What we are saying can also be more clearly understood in

9. Ps 61.6.
10. 1 Cor 15.28. On the centrality of this text to Origen’s thought, see Hen-
ri Crouzel, “Quand le Fils transmet le Royaume à son Père: L’interprétation
d’Origène,” in Studia Missionalia 33 (1984): 359–84.
11. Subiectione videlicet illa quam de Spiritu intellegi dignum est.
12. Omnia nostra in se recipit.
13. Cf. Mt 25.35–40.
14. Cf. De principiis 1.6.1 [GK 216]: subiectionis enim nomen, qua Christo
subicimur, salutem quae a Christo est indicat subiectorum.
96 ORIGEN

another way. If some part of our body aches, though our soul
remains unharmed and all the other parts of our body are
healthy, nevertheless because the whole person suffers from
the pain of one part, we do not say that we are healthy, but that
we are ill. For example, we say, “He is not well.” Why? Because
his feet or kidneys or stomach aches. And no one says that he
is healthy but that his stomach aches, but rather that he is not
healthy because his stomach aches.
If you have grasped this example, let us now return to the
subject at hand. The Apostle says that we are “the Body of
Christ and individually are members.”15 Therefore, Christ,
whose Body is the entire human race—or perhaps rather the
whole of the entire creation16 —and each one of us is a mem-
ber of it; if someone from among us who are called his mem-
bers is sick and is afflicted with some disease of sin, that is,
if the stain of some sin is branded upon him and he is not
subject to God, he [Christ] is correctly said not yet to be made
subject, for his members include those who are not subject to
God. But when he possesses all those who are called his Body,
and its members are in a healthy state, so that they suffer from
no disease of disobedience, when all the members are healthy
and subject to God, he rightly describes himself as subject,
when we his members are in every respect obedient to God.
But if you wish to examine yourself thoroughly and see
whether you are now subject to God, or if you are as yet still
disobedient, this is the way to scrutinize yourself: if there is
nothing contrary to God in you, then you are subject to him.17
But we mean “contrary” in this way: “God is love”;18 if there is
15. 1 Cor 12.27: ὑμεῖς δὲ ἐστε σῶμα Χριστοῦ καὶ μέλη ἐκ μέρους; the text of
Rufinus reads et unusquisque nostrum membra ex parte; the Vulgate has simply et
membra de membro.
16. Cf. Fragm in Jn 45 [GCS 4.520]: καὶ ἑτέρᾳ δὲ ἐκκλησίᾳ γράφων ὁ αὐτὸς
ἀπόστολος μνημονεύσας τοῦ Ἀδὰμ καὶ τῆς γυναικὸς ἐπιφέρει.Τὸ μυστήριον τοῦτο μέγα
ἐστιν, ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω εἰς Χριστὸν καὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, ἵνα ὡς ἐκεῖνοι γονεῖς ἐγένοντο πάντων
ἀνθρώπων, οὕτως ὁ Χριστὸς καὶ ἡ ἐκκλησία πάντων τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἔργων, νοημάτων τε
καὶ λόγων, γεννήτορες ὦσιν. Cf. also Origen’s account of Christ’s Body in an explic-
itly apologetic context, Contra Celsum 6.48 [SC 147.298–300].
17. Jas 4.7–10 seems to be the “lens” through which the following is under-
stood.
18. 1 Jn 4.16.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 36 [37] 97

no hatred in you, you do not have what is contrary to God. God

is Truth;19 see that there is no deceit in you, for it is opposed to
the Truth. For if there is deceit in you, you are not subject to
God, but to him who is the father of lies.20 If there is injustice
in you, you are subject to the father of injustice rather than
to God, who is Justice.21 If you detect the remaining vices22 in
yourself, know that as long as they remain, you are subject not
to God, but to the devil. For example, it is clear that, at the mo-
ment of fornication, we are subject to the spirit of fornication
and opposed to the spirit of chastity. At the moment of rage or
wrath, we are subservient to the spirit of anger and resistant to
the spirit of gentleness. For this reason then, seeing that our
entire life is lived as a kind of struggle for obedience,23 whether
to Christ or to the one who is opposed to Christ, let us make
every effort through the devout practice of prayer and train-
ing 24 to accomplish this: that we may never find ourselves obedi-
ent to the devil or to his wickedness, but that our every action,
word, and thought may be found to be subject to Christ.
But what if perhaps you say, “What benefit is there if I am
now subject when I have sinned previously and already been
hindered by my failures?” There is no doubt that when we have
done wrong we have not been subject to God, but when we
stop our wrongdoing, then we have taken the first step toward
subjection. When, therefore, we have been made subject to the
fear of God and we stop sinning, then, too, do we receive the
confidence to ask forgiveness for our earlier failures. But as
long as we persist in our failures, we seek forgiveness of our
sins in vain. This is also why I remember telling you often that
we ask for the forgiveness of our failures worthily when, situ-
ated far from sin, we are able to say, “Do not recall our sins
of old.”25 It does not say “those things that we are doing,” but

19. Jn 14.6.
20. Mendacii pater; cf. Jn 8.44.
21. Cf. Ps 16.1.
22. reliqua in te . . . vitia.
23. Agonem quendam obaudientiae.
24. Per orationis, per eruditionis religiosam institutionem, taking eruditio as a Latin
equivalent for ἄσκησις.
25. Ps 78.8.
98 ORIGEN

rather, “those things that we once did.” Therefore, be subject to

the Lord and—being made subject—sin no more, and then pray
to him 26 for your failings, both more recent and from of old.27
2. Do not be jealous of him who is successful in his way, of the
man who does evil.28 This describes human experience. For not
infrequently if we see a wicked person prospering and living
what people call the “happy life,” we are scandalized and our
faith is endangered; in our hearts we grumble against divine
Providence and say, “What profit is there in good behavior?
See, just persons experience hardships, but this unjust per-
son lives happily. He is unjust, yet he has obtained the great-
est wealth, he has climbed to the highest pinnacle of public
office and power; perhaps being unjust is preferable to being
just!” Unhealthy and fragile souls such as these, even if they
do not utter a word, nevertheless say this in their heart when
they see the wicked enjoying prosperity in their way of life.29
And so this command comes to our aid as a medicine so that
we do not become jealous when we see these things, that is, so
that we do not provoke the Lord to anger against us by saying
such things in our hearts. Instead, we ought to recall that this
present age belongs to those who do not possess hope of the
happiness to come.
So let us therefore endure patiently those who live prosper-
ously here, who receive good things in their life, 30 until our
own age arrives, the age to which we have been invited and
whose goods have been promised to us, the age to which we
look forward, in which we place our hope, whose goods do not
pass away as a shadow does31 in this age, but which last forever.
Moreover, it is impossible to obtain good things both in this

26. Ps 36.7.
27. Pro delictis praeteritis et antiquis; while perhaps seemingly synonymous, the
use of both praeteritis and antiquis may signal a distinction between recently past
and long past; it is also possible that praeteritis implies not only “former,” but
also “previously omitted [withheld]” or “neglected [and only now recognized].”
28. Ps 36.7.
29. Cum viderint iniquos prosperis successibus agere in via sua; on this use of via,
cf. OLD s.v. § 7.
30. Cf. Lk 16.25.
31. Cf. Wis 5.9.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 36 [37] 99

present age and in the age to come. For it is inevitable that

it be said to one individual: “You received your goods during
your life”; and to another, “You received bad things,” so that
one receives good things in place of bad ones and the other
bad things in place of good ones, just like, for example, that
rich man and Lazarus.32 For this reason, then, Do not be jealous
of him who is successful in his way, of the man who does evil.
3. After this, it calls to our attention the vice by which nearly
all of us are troubled, and I do not know if anywhere that rare
individual is to be found who is so perfect as to be free from
this affliction. It says, Cease from anger and let go of indignation.33
There are many vices that are easily avoided by many people.
For example, if someone has made a greater effort at chastity,
he has cast off the evil of impurity. A considerable number of
people have also mastered greed, so that, even though they are
not perfect in other respects, they nevertheless seem to avoid
this evil, and even a few others. But the vice of anger is harsh
and sharp, and it inflames and disquiets even those who ap-
pear to be wise. This is why Solomon says in Proverbs, “Anger
destroys even the wise”;34 that is, he is saying, “Do not be as-
tonished if anger inflames the fool, the wicked, the unbeliever:
it frequently disquiets even good and wise men.”
This sin, then, is one of those that will add wood, straw,
stubble to the building, and it is necessary that materials of
this kind be tested, as it is written, 35 through fire, so that we
remain in the fire as long as it takes for us to be purged of the
wood of anger, the straw of indignation, and the stubble of
words—words, that is, that we have uttered at the prompting
of such vices. For this reason, then, cease from anger and let go of
indignation, which is to say, when you are moved to anger, do
not give in to your wrath,36 but stop, let go, and disregard it.
But when we receive these commands, and are moved in
precisely the opposite direction, we cease not from anger but

32. Cf. Lk 16.25.

33. Ps 36.8.
34. Cf. Prv 29.8.
35. Cf 1 Cor 3.11–13.
36. Animis; animus here is likely the equivalent of θυμός.
100 ORIGEN

from gentleness, and we abandon not indignation, but meek-

ness. But let us at least begin now to reform ourselves, and,
little by little, soothing anger through s­elf-control and con-
tinuous reflection,37 let us also reach the point where we are
angry no longer; and, continually beating back the onset of
indignation, which is aroused through wrath, let us arrive even
at the point at which we are no longer troubled by the impulse
toward indignation. Do not be zealous to do evil.38 Do not, it says,
become evil yourself by provoking others to emulate your wick-
edness, because zeal for what is evil is always eager to outdo
another in wickedness.
4. For those who act wickedly will be driven away; but those who
wait for the Lord will possess the land as an inheritance.39 It appears
that wickedness is some other kind of evil, in addition to the
rest of the sins.40 This is why this sacred passage portrays one
man as a sinner and another as wicked, just as it also employs
a similar distinction when it says, “Break the arm of the sinner
and of the e­ vil-doer (maligni),”41 meaning the wicked (nequam).
But in the Gospel, the Lord also called the devil not only a
sinner, but wicked or evil (malignum vel malum),42 and when
he teaches on prayer, he even says, “Deliver us from the Evil
One,”43 and elsewhere says that “an evil man (malus) has done
this,”44 meaning an ­evil-doer (malignus). Some define πονηρία,
that is, wickedness (nequitiam), as intentional or voluntary
wrongdoing (malitiam). For it is one thing to do evil through
ignorance as if overcome by evil, but it is another to do what is

37. Assiduam meditationem; this could be rendered “constant practice” or

“continuous exercise.”
38. Ps 36.8; aemulari is explained in Hom in Ps 36.1.1 [SC 411.50–58]; cf.
also SC 411.105, n. 2.
39. Ps 36.9.
40. This distinction occurs below at 7.
41. Ps 9.36 LXX (10.15).
42. Cf. Mt 13.19.
43. Mt 6.13; this is Origen’s interpretation of this petition, rather than un-
derstanding it as a neuter substantive; cf. his De oratione 29.1–30.3 [GCS 3.381–
395].
44. Mt 13.28; cf. Mt 13.38: τὰ δὲ ζιζάνιά εἰσιν οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ πονηροῦ (Vlg = zizania
autem filii sunt nequam).
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 36 [37] 101

evil willfully and with intent,45 and this is wickedness [nequitia].

This is why the devil is rightly called by the name πονηρός, that
is, Evil or Wicked One. But the Savior also chastises us when
he said, “If then you, though wicked, know to give good things
to your children.”46
Therefore, now it says, For those who act wickedly will be driv-
en away; but those who wait for the Lord will possess the land as an
inheritance. There is, in addition, another kind of land, which
Scripture says is “flowing with milk and honey,”47 a land that
the Savior also in the Gospels promised in return to those who
are gentle (mansuetis) when he said, “Blessed are the meek
(mansueti), for they will inherit the land.”48 This land of ours,
in which we dwell, is appropriately called “dry land,”49 just as
this heaven, the one we gaze upon, is appropriately termed the
“firmament.”50 But this firmament also takes the name “heav-
en” from the title of the other heaven, as the text of Genesis
clearly teaches. What does this mean then? In this present life
we use the terms “heaven” and “earth” for those visible entities
in which we find nothing of the true heaven and true earth
except the names. But I think they are called such here so that,
when these are so named, those that are true and great will
come to mind and engender a longing in those who use these
names.
Who are the ones who will possess the land as an inheri-
tance? Those, it says, who wait for the Lord. We wait for the Lord,
for he is our Hope51 and our Patience, as it is written: “And
what now is my hope? Is it not the Lord?”52 For just as our
Savior is Wisdom53 and Peace54 and Justice, 55 so too he is also
45. Voluntate et studio.
46. Mt 7.11.
47. Cf. Ex 3.8.
48. Mt 5.5.
49. Cf. Gn 1.10.
50. Cf. Gn 1.8; cf. De principiis 2.11.6 [GK 450–454].
51. Exspectatio; the pun on the verb exspectamus (“we wait for”) is lost in En-
glish.
52. Ps 38.8.
53. Cf. 1 Cor 24.30.
54. Cf. Eph 2.14.
55. Cf. 1 Cor 1.30.
102 ORIGEN

our Hope and Patience. And just as we are made just through
participation in his justice, and we become wise through par-
ticipation in his wisdom, so also we are made patient by par-
ticipation in his patience. Therefore, he is like an everlasting
spring, 56 from which we can draw patience and justice and wis-
dom and everything whatsoever that is good from the virtues,
but only if the vessels we bring to the spring are worthy and
clean. Thus it says, But those who wait for the Lord will possess the
land as an inheritance.
5. But after these words a certain mystical saying is add-
ed, one that is above my hearing and beyond my speech, and
which transcends my understanding. For it speaks, whether in
reference to all sinners or to some individual sinner, in the
singular: A little while longer, and the sinner will be no more. 57 It
speaks of this “little while” as being really from the present
time until the end of the age, or, perhaps, even beyond the
end of the age and until that avenging fire consumes those
who are enemies. 58 But if it happens in some other way that
“the sinner will be no more,” then let one who is able inves-
tigate and determine how it can come about that “the sinner
will be no more.”
Nevertheless, a little while longer, and the sinner will be no more;
you will seek his place and you will not find him. 59 Moreover, not
only will the sinner no longer exist, but not even the sinner’s
place will exist. What does the “place of the sinner” mean ex-
cept those things that pass away? For it says, “Heaven and earth
will pass away.”60 Without a doubt, then, along with the sin that
has passed away, the place of the sinner will also pass away.61
“Heaven,” it says, “and earth will pass away, but my words will
not pass away.”62 Let us be eager, then, to do the words of God,
which do not pass away, lest perchance we perish along with
those things that pass away. For if we commit sin, which passes
56. Cf. Jn 4.14.
57. Ps 36.10.
58. Cf. Dt 9.3; Heb 12.29.
59. Ps 36.10.
60. Mt 24.35.
61. Praeteriet = praeteribit; cf. the Vulgate text of Wis 1.8 and Sir 39.37.
62. Mt 24.35; terra, of course, being rendered both “earth” and “land.”
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 36 [37] 103

away, we will doubtless also be counted among those things

that pass away. But if we act with justice,63 which does not pass
away, neither will we pass away, but we will abide in the compa-
ny of the Justice that abides, according to what is written: “Is
my hand not able to save you? Have I dulled my ear so that I
do not hear you? Rather, it is your sins that cause separation
between you and God.”64
But further, it is not without some spiritual basis that from
the beginning of creation a firmament is said to have been
made which was to cause a separation between the waters
and to divide the dwelling place of mortals from the abodes
and dwelling places of the angels. It follows, then,65 that this
dry ground,66 which the Lord also called “land,”67 has been
appointed as the place for us sinners. But there are also cer-
tain other places called “waters,” over which the Spirit of the
Lord is said to have hovered. There are certain other places
called “the abyss,” over which darkness is reported to have
been placed.68 Indeed, it is said in reference to the waters in
another passage of Scripture that “the waters saw you, God;
the waters saw you and were afraid.”69 But in reference to the
abyss it says that “the abyss was thrown into confusion”;70 with-
out doubt, this is because the abyss does not have peace, but
darkness, placed over it. Moreover, the demons too are said in
the Gospel to have asked not to be commanded to go off into
the abyss,71 as though into a kind of place of punishment suit-
ed to them and their activities. Not only, then, will the sinner
be no more, but even his place, whatever it is, will be sought for
and will not exist.
63. Si autem facimus iustitiam, correlated to studeamus ergo nos facere verba Dei
and si enim peccatum facimus, hard to duplicate in English.
64. Is 59.1–2. The text here is substantially the same as found in the Vulgate;
the LXX text is in the third person: ἢ ἐβάρυνεν τὸ οὖς αὐτοῦ τοῦ μὴ εἰσακοῦσαι.
65. Ex eo ergo: offering the mystica ratio referred to in the previous sentence.
The link among all these texts is, of course, terra.
66. Haec arida.
67. Cf. Gn 1.10.
68. Cf. Gn 1.2: καὶ σκότος ἐπάνω τῆς ἀβύσσου.
69. Ps 76.17.
70. Ibid.
71. Cf. Lk 8.31.
104 ORIGEN

6. But the meek will possess the land.72 This verse is to be

brought forward against the Valentinians and other heretics,
who think that my Savior says in the Gospel things that are
not found in the Old Testament,73 just as we have learned
from a certain elder74 to bring forth such texts in order to
confute them. But as to what is said in the Gospel: “Blessed are
the meek, for they will possess the land,”75 see how what was
already said before by the Holy Spirit through David, Christ
himself now speaks in the Gospel: “Blessed are the meek, for
they will possess the land as an inheritance.”
The prophet also rightly adds something more than we read
in the Gospel when he says: And they will find delight in an abun-
dance of peace.76 Here the Greek also uses the same word, about
which we have spoken earlier:77 κατατρυφήσουσιν, meaning
“they will delight,” (deliciabuntur) rather than “they will find
delight” (delectabuntur). In either case,78 the meek will find de-
light in an abundance of peace. If men are fleshly, they find de-
light in the foods that will be destroyed along with their belly,
just as the Apostle says: “Food is for the belly and the belly is
for food, but God will destroy them both.”79 The saints, howev-
er, think little of these delights and spit them back;80 for they
possess their delight81 in an abundance of peace. Yet “the abun-
dance of peace” is said to exist in the days of the Christ, for so
it is written: “And there will be an abundance of peace in his
days, until the moon be taken away.”82
Whoever, then, ceases from anger and lets go of indignation,83
whose mind is not aroused to wrath, and who does not use
72. Ps 36.11.
73. In antiquis litteris; cf. Prinzivalli, ed., Origene, Omelie sui Salmi (1991), 424.
74. Sicut et nos didicimus a quodam presbytero.
75. Mt 5.5.
76. Ps 36.11.
77. Here again Rufinus distinguishes between delectari and deliciari; cf. Hom
in Ps 36.1.4 [SC 411.76–80].
78. The best possible way, I think, to render: Igitur deliciabuntur sive delectabun-
tur mansueti in multitudine pacis.
79. 1 Cor 6.13.
80. Respuunt; fitting, given the metaphor.
81. Here Rufinus opts for the present idiom habent delicias for delectabuntur.
82. Ps 71.7.
83. Ps 36.8.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 36 [37] 105

angry words, and who is totally at peace, not only externally

but also internally, who does not succumb to one who provokes
him to anger and does not himself provoke another to anger,
but who keeps peace with himself and with others in the face
of possible disagreement, who encourages the love of meek-
ness, which is the guardian of peace, and who lives up to all his
responsibilities faithfully,84 this person delights or finds delight
in an abundance of peace.
7. The sinner will watch the just one and will grind his teeth
against him.85 Just as, in nature, light is opposed to darkness,
so too the sinner and the just person are opposed one to the
other. If, at some point, you see a just person being hated, 86
do not hesitate to say about the one who hates the just person,
“he is a sinner.” If you see someone who lives a good life suf-
fering persecution, do not hesitate to say concerning the one
who is doing the persecuting, “Not only is he a sinner, he is
wicked.”87 The sinner, then, will watch the just one—and, watch-
ing him—will grind his teeth against him. As to its saying: he will
grind his teeth, I do not know if this should be understood in
reference to bodily teeth, though it is possible that this too be
done by a sinner against a just person. When he threatens him,
when he rages against him, when his voice is silent but his rage
is roaring,88 when he lays traps for the just person and plots
every kind of evil against him, then what is said is fulfilled in a
bodily way also: he will grind his teeth against him. But when the
sinner does these things against the just man, The Lord, it says,
will laugh at him, for he foresees that his day will come.89 What day
belonging to the sinner does the Lord foresee? That day, no
doubt, when the sinner will be sought for, but will be no more.
8. Sinners have drawn the sword; they have bent their bow to cast

84. Fidelissimaque cuncta moderatur; more literally, “and who governs all things
in a most dependable fashion”; or, perhaps alternately and even more loosely,
“and is completely reliable.”
85. Ps 36.12.
86. Odio haberi; cf. Hom in Ps 37.2.8 [SC 411.322].
87. This distinction between peccatum and nequitia is found earlier at 4. See
above, pp. 100–101.
88. Cum silet voce clamat furore.
89. Ps 36.13.
106 ORIGEN

down the needy and the poor.90 Not that every kind of sinner 91
possesses a bodily (corporalem) sword; rather, let us see if per-
haps, just as there are certain armaments of God (among
which are said to be the breastplate of justice and the sword
of the Spirit and the shield of faith),92 there are not also cer-
tain armaments of the devil with which a sinful person is clad.
Therefore, let us understand this opposition on the basis of
contraries:93 let us imagine two armed soldiers, one a soldier
of God, the other a soldier of the devil. If indeed the soldier
of God possesses a breastplate of justice, without a doubt the
soldier of the devil wears a breastplate of injustice opposed to
it. And if the soldier of God shines in a helmet of salvation,94
in opposition the sinner, who is a soldier of the devil, wears a
helmet of perdition. And if the feet of the soldier of Christ are
readied for the race of preaching of the Gospel,95 on the con-
trary the feet of the sinner are swift to spill blood,96 and his
shoes (that is, what he is prepared for) are readied for sin. The
soldier of God, then, possesses a kind of shield of faith while
the soldier of the devil has a shield of infidelity.
So, too, there is what one might call a sword of the Holy
Spirit in the possession of those who are soldiers for God;97 but
there is also a sword of evil in the possession of those who are
soldiers for sin; this is the sword sinners are here said to draw.98
But in what way are we to think of sinners as drawing a sword?
When without shame or any pretense of embarrassment, they
carry out their wicked designs and neither blush nor show fear,
and do not put away their malice as in a scabbard and conceal
it, but with a proud and exalted spirit flash it like some kind
of sword. Similarly, they also act out what follows: namely, they
have bent their bow.99 But the just, too, have a bow, and they also

90. Ps 36.14.
91. Non quo omni genere peccatores.
92. Cf. Eph 6.13–17.
93. A contrariis igitur intellegamus contraria.
94. Cf. Is 59.17; Eph 6.14–16.
95. Cf. Eph 6.14–16; 2 Tm 4.7.
96. Cf. Is 59.7; Rom 3.15.
97. Cf. 2 Tm 2.4.
98. In reference to Ps 36.14.
99. Ps 36.14.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 36 [37] 107

have arrows. In fact, one of their arrows is the Lord Jesus, for he
himself professes: “And he placed me as a chosen arrow.”100 And
so the just possess arrows, as do sinners.
A word is an arrow. Indeed, a word from a just person, when
it reproves and corrects the sinner, punctures and pierces the
heart of the sinner like an arrow so that he might be converted
to penance and be saved. A word from a sinner, however, is
poisoned and shoots and wounds the one who is not protected
by the armaments of God. For the words of the wicked prevail
against us when we are less than carefully protected by the
shield of faith.101 They have bent their bow, then, to cast down the
needy and the poor. Sinners know that they are unable to cast
down the rich person, and so they do not lay snares for him,
but all their snares are designed against the poor man, as it
is also said elsewhere that “he lurks like a lion in his den; he
lurks that he might seize the poor man.”102
And so “the ransom of a man”—a rich man—“is his wealth,
but the poor cannot sustain threats.”103 And so let us become
rich in spiritual goods,104 rich, that is, “in every word and in all
knowledge,”105 in good works,106 casting aside the riches of sin,
looking ahead “not to the things that are seen, but those that
are not seen. For those riches that are seen are temporary; but
those that are not are eternal.”107 And if we grow wealthy in
such riches, we cannot be wounded by the arrows of sinners.
For they will be deflected108 by the shield of faith,109 through
Christ our Lord and Savior, “to whom are glory and power for
ever and ever. Amen.”110

100. Is 49.2. For Origen, it is Christ who is speaking through Isaiah; cf. Hom
in Ps 37.1.2 [SC 411.272].
101. Cf. Eph 6.1.6 and above.
102. Ps 9.30.
103. Prv 13.8; “ransom” (here redemptio) renders the LXX λύτρον.
104. Cf. 1 Tm 6.18.
105. 1 Cor 1.5.
106. Cf. 2 Cor 9.8.
107. 2 Cor 4.18.
108. Restinguentur; or “neutralized”; cf. OLD s.v. § 2.b.
109. Cf. Eph 6.16.
110. 1 Pt 4.11; 5.11.
HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37]

T H I R D HOM I LY ON P S A L M 3 6 [37 ]

N AN EARLIER homily, we were speaking about the

sword and the bow of sinners and about the armor
of God, and that all people have been fitted with ar-
maments. And since I said “all people,” I will now add what
was left unsaid earlier, namely, that these are people who are
capable of sinning or refraining from sin. For infants are inca-
pable of handling either the armaments of God or those of the
devil. But those who have become capable of knowing what is
right and of avoiding what is contrary to it—in word, thought,
or action—these are the ones who are all said to possess arma-
ments. And so, if they sin, they possess the armaments of the
devil and of iniquity; but if they act rightly, they will be said to
be clothed in the armor of God.
We were explaining what was said, Sinners have drawn the
sword, they have bent their bow,1 with reference to the Apostle,
who spoke concerning their opposite: “And the sword of the
Spirit which is the Word of God”;2 for the sword of sinners is
the wicked spirit that is in them, who inspires them to blasphe-
mous, wicked, and disgraceful words. For example, if you see
pagans bickering and disputing among themselves, throwing
various impieties against each other with the tricks of dialec-
tic, then you can correctly say, Sinners have drawn the sword. But
even I, who am called a believer, if I am perhaps engaged in a
struggle with someone, and if, having been provoked to wrath
and having abandoned meekness, I should spout ravings from
a lying spirit 3 and reveal that I am swollen with poisonous
1. Ps 36.14.
2. Eph 6.17.
3. Crouzel suggests this spiritus mendacis refers to a line above: spiritus . . .
nequam, qui eos inspirat ad verba blasphemiae [SC 411.128].

108
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 109

words, I, too, am rightly said to be a “sinner who has drawn his

sword.”
Therefore, the best thing4 is not even to possess a sword of
sin, or at least 5 not to draw it, but to keep it in its scabbard.
For if the sword is not pulled from its scabbard, nor made
use of, its edge becomes dull and it rusts, and if it never sees
action, it will be thoroughly destroyed. The Lord also makes
this promise: that he will destroy the sword6 (that is, sin), so
that the sinner will be no more.7 But certainly if, because of
the admonitions of God’s Word, we anticipate this task, and
if, while in this life, we make the sin in us perish, so that the
sword of sin is never at all drawn by us—whether in thought,
deed, or word—we will have no need8 for the punishment of
eternal fire,9 nor will we be condemned to the outer dark-
ness,10 nor will we find ourselves under those penalties that
threaten sinners.11 But if, in this life, we disregard the words
of divine Scripture that admonish us and we do not wish to be
healed or reformed by its words of correction, it is certain that
that fire which has been prepared for sinners awaits us, and
we will encounter that fire which “will test the quality of each
one’s work.”12
Further, in my opinion, it is necessary for all of us to en-
counter that fire. Even if one be a Paul or a Peter, he will never-
theless come to that fire. But individuals like these hear: “Even
though you pass through fire, the flame will not burn you.”13
But if someone is a sinner like me, he will indeed come to that
fire like Peter and Paul, but he will not pass through it in the
same way as Peter and Paul.

4. Bonum igitur primum.

5. Secundum vero est saltim.
6. Cf. Ps 9.7 [LXX]; romphaeam [= ῥομφαίαν]; cf. also below, at 5, p. 116 n. 58.
7. Cf. Ps 36.10.
8. Here, typical of Origen, penalties and punishments are understood as re-
medial.
9. Cf. Jude 7.
10. Cf. Mt 8.12.
11. Cf. Mt 25.46.
12. 1 Cor 3.13.
13. Is 43.2.
110 ORIGEN

Just as the Hebrews came to the Red Sea, so too the Egyp-
tians came, but the Hebrews passed through the Red Sea,
while the Egyptians were drowned in it.14 In this way, too, if
we are indeed Egyptians and we follow Pharaoh, the devil, and
are obedient to his commands,15 we sink into that river16 or
lake17 of fire, since sins have been discovered in us that surely
we have chosen under the commands of Pharaoh. If, howev-
er, we are Hebrews, and have been redeemed by the blood of
the spotless lamb,18 if we do not carry with us the leaven19 of
wickedness, 20 we also enter the river of fire. Yet just as the wa-
ter was a wall for the Hebrews on the right and on the left, 21
so also there will be a wall of fire, if we, too, do what was said
of the Hebrews, that “they had faith in God and in his ser-
vant, Moses,”22 that is, in his law and his commandments, and
if we follow the pillar of fire and the pillar of cloud.23 We have
brought these things to mind as an admonition as we review
the explanation of how sinners have drawn the sword.
2. But we should not carelessly pass over the fact that they
are said to have bent their bow.24 This we manage not by a juxta-
position of contraries as in the other passages, but from a com-
parison.25 In the tenth Psalm it is written: “Sinners have bent
the bow, they have readied arrows in the quiver that they might
shoot the upright of heart in the dark.”26 Hence it is clear that
the heart of the impious, like a quiver, is filled with poisoned
arrows. The arrows of the impious are therefore their utterly
wicked plans and designs; in fact, their mouth and lips are like

14. Cf. Ex 14.22–29.

15. Cf. Jos 24.24.
16. Cf. Dn 7.10–11.
17. Cf. Rv 19.20.
18. Cf. 1 Pt 1.19.
19. Cf. Ex 12.34.
20. Cf. 1 Cor 5.8.
21. Cf. Ex 14.29.
22. Ex 14.31.
23. Cf. Ex 13.21.
24. Ps 36.14.
25. Cf. above, contrasting the arma diaboli to the arma Dei; cf. also Hom in Ps
36.2.8 [SC 411.118].
26. Ps 10.2.
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 111

a kind of bow, by which, once expanded and stretched, they

hurl darts from a poisoned heart. Moreover, the words “in the
dark” are said fittingly. For individuals such as these do not
move about in the day, 27 that is, in the light of God, but walk
rather in the darkness and lurk in the shadows of wickedness
and ignorance. Now as to their shooting the upright of heart,
that means the simple and those who are unaware of their ma-
licious designs. I think, however, that this phrase is uttered not
so much about sinful humans as about the opposing powers;28
for they are the ones who “shoot the upright of heart in the
dark.”
For this reason, then, those who are upright of heart should
be alert day and night because “they have readied arrows.” It
did not say “they have hurled” but rather “they have readied
arrows”; they have not shot them yet, nor have they caused
wounds, but they are readying themselves to shoot. You see
that we are warned before we are wounded, so that we can de-
fend ourselves against their blows29 and take every precaution
to safeguard our heart.
3. I also want to uncover something further while we find
ourselves among these passages, so that we might not always
be speaking to you concerning lower things, but that we might
also from time to time take a stab at some of the higher things.
I think, then, that just as the Savior is the arrow of God, as is
written, “And he placed me as a chosen arrow,”30 without doubt
in a similar way, Moses, in whom he has spoken, is also an ar-
row of God. And it is certain that the other prophets and apos-
tles of Christ, in whom Christ himself was speaking,31 wounded
and pierced with the arrow of God the heart of those to whom
they were speaking the word of God, so that those who heard
them speak would say, “I am wounded with charity.”32 Then
again, on the other hand, in the same way that Christ is the
27. Cf. Rom 13.13.
28. Contrariis potestatibus; cf. Eph 6.12. Eph 6.10–17 appears to provide an
interpretive “lens” for understanding these verses.
29. Ab illorum vulneribus; here meaning “blows” more than “wounds.”
30. Is 49.2.
31. Cf. 2 Cor 13.3.
32. Song 2.5.
112 ORIGEN

chosen arrow of God, 33 so also Antichrist is the arrow of the

devil. And, following this comparison, just as all the prophets
and apostles in whom Christ has spoken or is speaking were
themselves also the arrows of God, and every just person and
preacher who speaks the word of God for the salvation of oth-
ers can be called an arrow of God, so too, all sinners in whom
the devil speaks can be called arrows of the devil. So, then,
when you see yourself wounded by arrows of the devil through
the mouth of a sinner, have compassion for the one who re-
veals himself to be a servant of the devil for this task.34 You,
however, take thought for yourself 35 and take hold of the shield
of faith, so that you might be able “to extinguish all the fiery
darts of the Evil One”36 with it.
Yet the darts of the devil are directed at us not only verbally,
but also in deeds. If you see a woman lying in wait to beguile
you, is she not also a fiery dart of the devil, since she speaks
to you in such a way as to kindle in you the fire of lust? In like
manner, if someone should arouse you to anger through bitter
and harsh words, is he too not a fiery dart of the Evil One,
by which you are inflamed and are kindled toward rage?37 Or
further, if someone provokes you and goads you in some other
way, which you are unable to bear patiently, and you fall into
sin, understand carefully and observe that all these individu-
als are fiery darts of the Evil One, by means of which he can
wound the upright of heart and inflame38 them toward sin.
But even more unhappily, I see few arrows of God, few in-

33. Cf. Is 49.2.

34. Origen here presumes a distinction between the devil, who is the source
of the verbal barbs, and the sinner, who is merely the instrument.
35. Nice parallelism with genitive objects: illius quidem miserere . . . tu autem
memor esto tui.
36. Eph 6.16; Origen elsewhere treats the issue of the “fiery darts” of the
Evil One: cf. De principiis 3.2.4 [GK 574–576], in relation to the cogitationes
(= λογισμοί, later developed taxonomically by Evagrius), which are insinuated
by the demons, as well as to particular memories, memoriae quaedam, aroused by
demonic influence; and 4.3.12 [GK 766–770], where the military language of
Eph is explicitly evoked; and Hom in Gen 10.4 [SC 7bis.268], where he speaks of
the concupiscentiae iacula directed by the devil at the soul.
37. There is a less than subtle play on the various words for heat–flame–fire.
38. Cf. Ps 10.2.
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 113

dividuals who speak in such a way as to inflame the heart of

their hearer and draw him away from sin that he might be
converted39 to penance. There are few who speak in such a
way that elicits a tear of repentance from the eye of the hearer
whose heart has been struck. There are few who, revealing the
light of future hope and bearing witness to the greatness of
the world to come and the glory of the Kingdom of God, are
capable of persuading men to think little of the things that are
seen and to seek out what is unseen, to reject what is temporal
and to pursue what is eternal.40 Such as these are quite few,
and in the case of these few (if there are any), because of envy
and resentment they are unable even to be of benefit to any.
But the arrows of the devil abound everywhere; the entire
earth is rife with them. The peoples, the cities, the military
are, for the most part, arrows of the Evil One—would that
they were found only there!—and the Enemy held sway among
them so as to possess them solely as arrows of his own. But as
it is, I am fearful also for those who are within,41 and I fear
for myself, lest the devil lead me into some scandal and make
use of me as an arrow against another’s soul!42 For the one
who would scandalize anyone, whether in word or in deed, be-
comes an arrow and a dart of the devil for that soul which he
has scandalized.
See what greater misfortune befalls us. When from time to
time we consider speaking against someone and blurt out words
recklessly, when we act quite contentiously and are eager to pre-
vail by means of any words whatsoever, it is then that the devil
makes use of our mouth like a bow, through which he points
his arrows and shoots the upright of heart,43 that is, those who
hear us saying things that cause them to suffer scandal.

39. Sed quod est infelicius, paucas video sagittas Dei, pauci sunt qui ita loquuntur ut
inflamment cor auditoris et abstrahant eum a peccato et convertatur ad paenitentiam [SC
411.136]; convertatur, taken here as passive; one is tempted to emend the text to
convertantur, understanding it as deponent and whose subject is pauci rather than
auditor, and thus paralleled with abstrahant, whose shared direct object is eum.
40. Cf. 2 Cor 4.18.
41. Eos qui intus sunt = members of the Church.
42. Adversus animam hominis, lit., “against a man’s soul.”
43. Cf. Ps 10.2.
114 ORIGEN

In the same way that God placed a bow in the clouds,44 that
a flood should not occur and that the storm should dissipate,
so too—in an opposite fashion—the devil places a bow, not to
cause them to dissipate, but to stir up storms, to disturb the
soul’s calm, to dispel peace, to incite conflicts, and to arouse
winds and tempests. For when you see someone going around
driven by vices and passions and setting everything on edge,
do not doubt that this individual is an arrow of the devil and
that the devil has placed his mouth as his bow and that he has
aimed his words as arrows, to shoot the upright of heart.45 But
those who are protected by the armor of God are incapable of
being wounded by such arrows.46
4. Moreover, as to its having added, that they might murder the
upright of heart,47 since, just before, it had said that they might
kill the needy and the poor,48 it has connected the upright of
heart with the poor. I think the Lord also, in the Gospels, links
them in a similar way, for where he says the poor are blessed,49
there he also declares blessed the clean of heart, 50 and I do
not think there is any difference between the clean of heart
and the upright of heart. Now this is how they are murdered.
If someone who is simple in mind and in intention enters the
Church that he might make progress, so that he might become
better than he is, if this person sees us, who have been estab-
lished in the faith for some time, either not acting rightly or
speaking scandalously, we become for him the cause of his fall
into sin. Moreover, when he sins, he has been murdered, the
blood of his soul spills out, and his very life departs from him.
And if you hear it said in Genesis that “I will require the
blood of your souls from every brother and every beast,”51 you
should not think that its admonition is so much about bodily
blood as it is about the blood of the inner man, that is, the life

44. Cf. Gn 9.13–16.

45. Cf. Ps 10.2.
46. Cf. Eph 6.16.
47. Ps 36.14b.
48. Ps 36.14a.
49. Cf. Mt 5.3; Lk 6.20.
50. Cf. Mt 5.8.
51. Gn 9.5a.
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 115

of the soul and the blood of the spirit. For the blood of the
soul of one who has been scandalized is poured out when he
has fallen into sin, and this is why it says that blood is required
from his brother.
But why also from a beast? If it is a believer who scandal-
izes you, he is a brother from whom your blood must be re-
quired. For it is your brother who has spilled your blood, and
for this reason it was said, “From the hand of the brother I
will require blood.”52 But when the opposing power, wild and
wicked, stirs a person into action, and when it is an unbeliever
through whom he secretly works, if he has been able to spill
the blood of your soul (that is, to throw you into sin), he is a
beast from whom the Lord requires your blood. Further, the
prophet Ezekiel, when he calls himself a watchman appointed
for the house of Israel, 53 if he announced the coming sword,
would not be made guilty of blood, but if he did not announce
it, he would be guilty of blood;54 and when it says in the Law,
if one does these things, he will be innocent of blood, 55 this
too without a doubt is a reference to the blood of the soul,
which is poured out through sin. For this reason we all ought
to fear lest perhaps the blood of another who is scandalized be
required of us, as the prophet indicates.
It was necessary for us to go over these matters again in or-
der to show more fully how Sinners have drawn the sword, and
have bent their bow,56 and who the poor one is whom they kill
and how the upright of heart are murdered and in particular
what it means to say that their blood is poured out.
5. But now let us see what is to become of these very sinners
who do these things, that is, who use the sword of the dev-
il and the darts of the Evil One; [let us see] what the Divine
Word again says about them: Let their ­two-edged sword (framea),
it says, enter into their own heart, and let their bow be broken. 57
A ­two-edged sword is a type of weapon called by this name
52. Gn 9.5b.
53. Cf. Ezek 3.17.
54. Cf. Ezek 3.18–19.
55. Cf. Dt 21.8–9.
56. Ps 36.14.
57. Ps 36.15.
116 ORIGEN

(framea). 58 It says that these words, then, which the wicked

and the sinful, under the devil’s inspiration, direct against the
just in order to murder the upright of heart,59 are to be turned
against those very ones who shoot them and are to return to
the place from which they had come. Just as it is said by the
Lord to the just and to the holy apostles, “Into whatever house
you enter, say, ‘Peace to this house’; and if a son of peace is
there, your peace will come upon him. If not, your peace will
be returned to you,”60 so also here conversely the sword of the
impious that is drawn to murder the upright of heart is said
to be turned back against them and plunged into their heart,
and their bow is said to be broken while the Lord frees the just
one from their snares.
6. A small amount is better to the just than the abundant riches of
sinners.61 This admonition is, on the literal level, immediately
useful to those who are more simple, and this must be spoken
of first, though there is also here something more profound,
which, “if someone is able to receive, let him receive it.”62 So let
us see what the letter teaches us.
In this world, both the just and the unjust share a concern
for life, to have the things necessary for survival. Yet the just
are less inclined to be concerned about their survival than
they are earnestly concerned about justice, so that, although
they must seek things that are necessary for their survival,

58. Prinzivalli, Origene, Omelie sui Salmi (1991), 428–29, citing TLL,
VI.1.1239, notes that framea translates ῥομφαία and renders genus teli est as “un
tipo di lancia”; it is used earlier, at 1. Throughout the Vulgate Psalter gladius
is generally used to render ῥομφαία, including Ps 36.15, and, e.g., 43.4 and
7; 88.44; and 149.6 (cf. also Rv 1.16), where it is modified as gladii ancipites
(=ῥομφαία δίστομοι). An exception is the Vulgate Ps 16.13 (iuxta LXX, though
not the iuxta Hebraicum, which uses gladius), where framea renders ῥομφαία of
the LXX. It is unclear why Rufinus would here employ framea for ῥομφαία (and
feel the need to explain it) when earlier (above at 1, p. 109 n. 6) he was content
to use the transliterated romphaea. The earlier classical use of framea is for a spear
or javelin, i.e., some kind of missile (which is why it is explained as genus teli est).
59. Ps 36.14.
60. Lk 10.5–6.
61. Ps 36.16.
62. Mt 19.12.
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 117

they are sought without injustice,63 so that their very income,

necessary for their daily use, is acquired with complete justice.
But the unjust care nothing for justice, but devote their entire
concern to this: how to acquire. All their striving is devoted to
seizing whatever profits they can in whatever manner they can.
They do not ask if they are acquiring honestly, if they are ac-
quiring with justice; they do not care whether in the judgment
of Christ their possessions are determined to have been sought
justly. How can they do such things, those who annex one field
to another and appropriate property after property 64 so as to
snatch something from their neighbor?
Since, then, one of two things necessarily happens—either
many things are acquired with injustice or a small amount is
acquired with justice—it says, A small amount is better to the just
than the abundant riches of sinners.65 In fact, “abundant riches”
in wickedness are designated by a particular name.66 This
is also why I think that our Lord and Savior proclaimed the
Mammon of wickedness to be very much a kind of god and
lord67 when he says, “Make for yourselves friends from wicked
Mammon.”68 This is the literal meaning.
Let us now see if these words also contain something hid-
den. There are, in this world, many different literary studies,
and you may see a great number of individuals starting out by

63. Absque iniustitia quaerantur; a nice example of litotes.

64. Cf. Is 5.8; 1 Kgs 21; cf. Hom in Ps 36.1.2 [SC 411.68–70].
65. Ps 36.16.
66. Which he explains as “Mammon.”
67. A clever juxtaposition of “Lord and Savior” (Dominum et Salvatorem) with
“god and lord” (deum et dominum).
68. Lk 16.9: Facite vobis amicos de iniquo mammona. This is an uncommon
reading. The Vulgate reads mammona iniquitatis. The bilingual Codex Bezae and
the earlier ­4th-century Latin Vercellensis read ἀδίκου μαμμωνᾶ and iniquo mam-
mona, respectively. Cf. Adolf Jülicher, Itala: Das Neue Testament in altlateinischer
Überlieferung (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1954), 4.186. This is the reading known to
and used by Ambrose, De Abraham 1.5 [CSEL 32.528] and Expositio evangelii se-
cundum Lucam [SC 52.99], as well as his biographer Paulinus [PL 14.41]. Un-
fortunately, Origen’s extant Homilies on Luke do not cite this verse. On the value
of the Vercelli manuscript and the Latin of Codex Bezae, see Philip Burton, The
Old Latin Gospels: A Study of their Texts and Language (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2000), esp. 21–23.
118 ORIGEN

learning from grammarians the songs of the poets and come-

dic stories, the fictitious and harrowing accounts found in the
tragedies, the lengthy and diverse volumes of histories, and
then next moving on to rhetoric, there to pursue every conceit
of eloquence. After these things, they come to philosophy, to a
thorough examination of dialectic, to investigate the relations
among syllogisms, to probe the powers of geometry, to exam-
ine astronomy 69 and the courses of the stars, not to mention
music, as well.70 Thus educated in all such varied and different
disciplines, through which they have learned nothing about
the will of God, they have indeed gathered abundant riches,
yet these are the riches of sinners.
You may see, however, a member of the Church, unskilled
indeed in word and lacking in education, but full of faith and
the fear of God, who, because of that fear of God, does not
dare to sin in any way, but is quite afraid to open his mouth,
lest by chance a bad word come forth from it, and, further,
keeps his guard up against failing in the slightest way. The one
who is rich in the wisdom of this world is incapable of being
on guard against such things. It is in comparing these two that
the divine word says, A small amount is better to the just than the
abundant riches of sinners.71 Even though the “riches of sinners”72
do exist—the wisdom of this world, in which they are rich and
abounding in eloquence—nevertheless they do not succeed, by
means of these things, in keeping themselves from sin, while
the “small amount” of the just person, who has faith as small
as a mustard seed,73 nonetheless a fully alive and ardent faith,
by means of which he protects himself and keeps himself from

69. Astrorum leges: a calque for ἀστρονομία.

70. For the view that this ancient paideia was ultimately concerned with moral
formation, see Ilsetraut Hadot, Arts libéraux et philosophie dans la pensée antique
(Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1984).
71. Ps 36.16; it is worth noting that the contrast between the sinners and the
just is heightened by the contrast between the plural (peccatores) and the singular
(iusto), which is not easily replicated in English; this is carried over in Origen’s
interpretive scheme.
72. Ut sint divitiae peccatorum, a concessive clause correlated with the follow-
ing nec tamen.
73. Cf. Mt 17.20.
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 119

sin, this small amount of faith is better to the just than the abundant
riches of sinners, which they possess in eloquence and in the wis-
dom of this world, which is brought to nothing.74
Nevertheless, if someone is able to possess riches, but not
the riches of sinners, and to gather some things from the trea-
suries of Moses the Lawgiver, and also to acquire some other
things from the wealth of the prophets, from Isaiah, from Jer-
emiah, and from Ezekiel, to examine as well the mysteries of
Daniel, and to penetrate the hidden and concealed treasuries
of the other prophets, this person is no longer compared to
the wise of this world, so as to be called better than they, but
is instead regarded as equal to those to whom it is said, “For
you have become rich in every word and in all knowledge.”75
These, who are destroying the wisdom of this world and who
have become as it were its conquerors, say that they are ready
to take captive “all understanding that exalts itself and sets
itself up against the knowledge of Christ.”76 And although the
one whom we have mentioned before is uneducated and unlet-
tered, yet he is a believer and is ­G od-fearing, that small amount
of faith is better to this just person than the abundant riches of sin-
ners, which they acquire from the wisdom of this world.77 But
superior to both of these78 is one who is rich in the word of
God and in the knowledge of truth, namely one who (as Paul
says) is rich both “in every word and in all knowledge” 79 and
who is no less rich in good works.
But if you want to know what it means to be rich in every
word, I will teach you briefly. Begin your inquiry first with the
word80 of Genesis, then on to the word of Exodus, after these
74. Destruitur, possibly rendering καταργεῖτε; cf. 1 Cor 2.6 and 1.19 (quoting
Is 29.14).
75. Emending the text, which has qui dicebant, to quibus dicebatur, as Paul is
the one speaking in 1 Cor 1.5.
76. 2 Cor 10.5.
77. Cf. 1 Cor 2.6.
78. “Both of these” refers to (a) the just and (b) sinners to whom the Psalm-
ist refers.
79. 1 Cor 1.5.
80. A synecdoche, as the use of verbum here seems a reference to the text of
the Scriptures taken as a whole unit; the “word of Exodus” seems to mean, for
example, the text or teaching of Exodus as a whole; but one should not overlook
120 ORIGEN

in the word of Leviticus, in Numbers, and in Deuteronomy;

enrich yourself from Joshua son of Nun, and likewise from all
the Judges; then from there in order from each and every one
of the books of divine Scripture, until you reach the riches of
the evangelists and apostles.
For example, someone who directs his attention to a word of
the Psalms and who chants the entire Psalter81 at will is certain-
ly rich, but not “in every word and in all knowledge,” but rich
in the word of the Psalter alone. Or if someone should direct
his efforts to the Gospels and to a reading of the apostles and
exercises himself in the teachings of the New Testament, this
one is rich too, but not in every word, but only in the word of
the evangelists and apostles. But if he is capable of thoroughly
learning the Old and the New Testament with equal devotion
and is informed by means of all his learning, so that he is ready
to offer an account concerning each word that has been written
and to adjust his life in accord with the word of the truth that
is contained in the Scriptures, then this is a person who is truly
rich in every word82 and in every good work.83 In my view, these
are the riches about which it is said: “The redemption of a per-
son’s life is his riches.”84 A small amount, then, is better to the just
than the abundant riches of sinners.85
7. For the arms of sinners will be broken.86 How can this stand
in a literal sense, even if someone might try unwittingly to do
violence? There are many things in the Scriptures expressed
in this way, which are capable of arousing even one who is pro-
foundly dense and sleepy, indeed of forcing him to see that it
the fact that for Origen all the words of Scripture convey and ultimately reveal
the Word.
81. For the use of the Psalter in the early Christian communities, see James
McKinnon, Music in Early Christian Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1986), esp. 10–11 on the difficulty of reconstructing much of what went
on with psalmody in the first Christian centuries; for other texts of Origen re-
garding psalmody and hymnody, see 36–41.
82. Cf. 1 Cor 1.6, which has formed the “lens” for interpreting this passage
for the last two paragraphs.
83. Cf. 2 Cor 9.8.
84. Prv 13.8.
85. Ps 36.16.
86. Ps 36.17.
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 121

is necessary for him to make every effort, once he has aban-

doned the letter, to rise up to a spiritual understanding; it is in
just this way that these “arms of the sinner” are now function-
ing, whose “breaking,” it warns, is near at hand. But in anoth-
er place it says, “Break the arm of the sinner and evildoer.” 87
What then? Are we to think that the bodily arm of the sinner is
to be broken? We see that this does not easily happen.
But if we look at how sinners, when puffed up with pride,
have both their bows and those arrows of theirs (about which
we have already spoken) ready and have drawn them against
the just, and when we see this entire scheme of theirs shattered
by the might of the Lord, it is in this way that the arm of the
sinner is rightly said to have been broken. Or in another sense,
the hand and the arm signify work. If, then, you should see
a sinner not reaching out his hand to a good work, a work of
mercy,88 it will not be unreasonable to say that his arm has
been broken. But it must not be believed that this kind of
breaking comes from God, but from the devil. For he is the
one who breaks and binds89 the arms of sinners so that they
do not extend them in mercy.
Therefore, a certain kind of breaking of sinners comes from
God, when he destroys and frightens off those who plot against
the just one. But there is also what one might call a breaking
that comes from the devil, when he hinders the exercise of a
good deed as if by binding and breaking the arms of unbeliev-
ers. There is also another breaking, which is indeed permitted
by God but which is carried out by the devil, that breaking
about which the devil spoke to the Lord: “But stretch forth
your hand and touch all that he [Job] possesses, if he should
not bless you to your face”;90 and then he received him into his
power. This is why Job himself said, “For it is the hand of the
Lord that has touched me.” 91

87. Ps 10.15.
88. Ad opus bonum, ad opus misericordiae; a clear reference to the various works
of mercy that follow in the homily.
89. Conterit et constringit.
90. Jb 1.11.
91. Jb 19.21.
122 ORIGEN

8. But the Lord supports the just.92 Those who are weak and
frail need another for support.93 Where collapse and fall
threaten, there support is sought. Moreover, taking into ac-
count human frailty, every human is both weak and liable to
fall. Indeed, in this Psalm it is written that the Lord supports the
just, yet in another it says, “The Lord supports all who fall and
raises those who are crushed.” 94 It only remains for us to stir
ourselves95 at last and wake up, so that if, when some fall96
threatens through weakness, we might beg the Lord to send
us his Word and his Wisdom,97 which supports and raises up
those who are about to fall.
9. The Lord knows the days of those without blemish, and their
inheritance will be forever.98 According to the Scriptures, as we
have seen in many other passages, the Lord does not know
all things, but only those things that are good; he is said not
to know the bad, not because there is actually something
that is hidden from his knowledge, but he is said not to know
those things that are not worthy of his knowing. We have also
demonstrated this on the basis of the Scriptures, when the
Apostle says, “If there is a prophet or spiritual one among you,
he should know what I am writing to you, for it is of the Lord.
But if someone does not know, he will not be known”;99 and in
the Gospel, when the Lord speaks to sinners: “I do not know
92. Ps 36.17.
93. Suffultore; taking the -or ending as indicative of an agent.
94. Ps 144.14.
95. Understanding expergiscamur as a medial passive.
96. Casus aliquis [= aliqui]; the indefinite pronoun used for the indefinite
adjective.
97. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.4.2 [SC 411.200]: Vides ergo quia semper Dei auxilio indige-
mus. Primo ne cademus, tum deinde etiam si ceciderimus, ut resurgamus. For Irenaeus,
the Son and the Spirit are the two “hands” of God employed in the creation of
humankind; cf. Adversus haereses 4.20.1 [SC 100.626] and 5.1.3 [SC 153.26]. Cf.
also Theophilus, Ad Autolycum, 1.7 and 2.15 [Ad Autolycum, ed. Robert M. Grant
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1970), 10, 50–52]; at 1.7 God is called the Physician who
employs his Word and Wisdom in the art of healing. Origen understands Christ
as both the Word and Wisdom of God (in light of 1 Cor 1.24), and hence here
suffulciat and erigat are singular; cf. Hom in Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.182].
98. Ps 36.18; the verb used throughout this paragraph is cognoscere, taken in
a pregnant sense.
99. 1 Cor 14.37–38.
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 123

you: depart from me, you evildoers”;100 just as it is said else-

where, “The Lord knows those who belong to him,”101 so here
the Lord is said to know the days not of the impious, but of
those without blemish. For the days of those without blemish
are worthy of the Lord’s knowledge.
Yet I do not know if this passage can be explained coherent-
ly according to its literal sense. For what possible days are there
that belong to those without blemish which do not also belong
to sinners? Since a “day” in this age is one and the same for
all, and, whether just or sinners, all pass their days in the same
light, just as the Lord himself says concerning the Father: “He
commands his sun to rise on the good and the bad,”102 how,
then, is the Lord here said to know the days of the those without
blemish as though something distinct and separate? But let us
see whether each individual does not perhaps make a “day”
proper to himself. If, when we put aside duplicity, we speak
the truth with our neighbor,103 we are living in the day of truth
and by the light of the truth; similarly, when we withdraw our-
selves from those who hate the brothers104 and who walk in
darkness,105 and we abide in fraternal love, we make for our-
selves days106 of charity. But further, when we safeguard jus-
tice and when, “visiting widows and orphans in their distress,
we preserve ourselves without blemish from this world,”107 we
make for ourselves days of those without blemish, these are the
“days” that the Lord is said to know when he knows the days of
those without blemish.
But if we wish to examine a yet more sacred meaning108 in
this passage, we can say that the evil days belong to this age, in
accord with what is written: “for the days are evil.”109 But there

100. Lk 13.27.
101. 2 Tm 2.19.
102. Mt 5.45.
103. Cf. Eph 4.25.
104. A reference to the community of the baptized.
105. Cf. 1 Jn 2.11.
106. Origen has moved from the singular “day” to the plural “days.”
107. Jas 1.27.
108. Sacratiorem adhuc sensum.
109. Eph 5.16.
124 ORIGEN

are other, good days, which belong to those who are without
blemish, [days] which the Lord knows, [days] in which their
inheritance will abide forever. It is then, without doubt, that
the just will receive the inheritance of life eternal and obtain
“what eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has it entered
the human heart what God has prepared for those who love
him.”110 For those are the days of those without blemish, in
which not this sun, which its setting removes and whose light
the ensuing night extinguishes, but the Sun of Justice, will
shine,111 who knows not the night,112 who is the eternal Light,
as it is written: “The Lord himself will be for them an eternal
light.”113
10. They will not be ashamed in the time of evil.114 Only the just
will be unashamed in the time of evil. But here the “time of
evil” refers to the time of judgment, because of the great num-
ber of sinners and those whom terrible torments will over-
whelm. It is, therefore, at the time of the resurrection, when
all will rise: some to life eternal, others to eternal shame;115 it
is then, it says, that the just will not be ashamed, because noth-
ing shameful will be found in their actions.
Moreover, it adds: And in the days of famine, they will be filled.116
It must first be asked what these days of famine are. In a cer-
tain passage, God issues a warning through the prophet and
says, “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, and I will
send a famine upon the land, not a hunger for bread nor a
thirst for water, but a famine of hearing the Word of God. And
they will gather around from east to west to hear the word
of the Lord, and they will not find it.”117 These, then, are the
“days of famine,” and this is the time of famine, when there
are none who speak the word of God, just as even now there is

110. 1 Cor 2.9.

111. Cf. Mal 3.20. Sol iustitiae and lumen are functioning here as ἐπίνοιαι of
the Word.
112. Cf. Rv 21.25; taking qui ... nesciat ... sit as a relative clause of characteristic.
113. Is 60.19–20; cf. Rv 22.5.
114. Ps 36.19.
115. Cf. Mt 25.46.
116. Ps 36.19.
117. Cf. Am 8.11–12.
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 125

a famine among the Jews. For nowhere are there prophets; the
wise man is nowhere to be found; nowhere is there one who is
considered prudent; nowhere the fi ­ fty-year-old; nowhere the
wise counselor; nowhere is found a listener who understands;
God has taken all these from Judea and from Jerusalem.118
But there also exists within us an immense fear that fam-
ine may perhaps threaten us as well. For just as those about
whom we just spoke, by reading the Law but not carrying it
out, met with this—namely, the clouds (that is, the prophets)
were commanded not to shower down upon them the rain of
God’s Word,119 they suffered a famine of God’s Word, and all
the gifts of God that we have spoken of earlier were taken from
them—we too should be wary lest some kind of punishment
such as this be brought upon us. Instead, we should become
not only hearers of the Law, but also doers,120 so that God will
command his clouds—not one or two, but many—to shower
rain upon us, so that in the Church “two or three prophets
might speak and others might test them. And if it is revealed
to the one seated, let the first one remain silent,”121 that there
might be many workers who correctly and unashamedly hand
on the word of truth,122 so that each teacher and those who
preach the Word of God might say with Paul, “I planted,” and
another “watered, but God granted the growth.”123 Moreover,
these things will happen if we who are watered by the clouds
and who hear the Word of God produce those fruits that the
Apostle describes, namely, “the fruits of the Spirit,” which are
“ joy, love, peace, patience, forbearance,”124 and others like
these. If we delay in producing such fruits, we must fear that
the clouds might be commanded to hold back their showers
from us125 and each one of the saints might begin to do what

118. Cf. Is 3.1–3.

119. Cf. Is 5.6.
120. Cf. Jas 1.22; Rom 2.13.
121. 1 Cor 14.29–30.
122. Cf. 2 Tm 2.15.
123. 1 Cor 3.6.
124. Gal 5.22.
125. Cf. Is 5.6.
126 ORIGEN

is written: “But the one who has understanding will sit and be
silent at that time, for the time is wicked.”126
But we should also call to mind an account of our forebears
concerning a time of famine, and how, during a time of fam-
ine, the just person is filled. I am thinking that the famine at
the time of the prophet Elijah, when the sky was closed for
three and a half years,127 is applicable here. Then too, the peo-
ple were indeed imperiled by a famine, yet Elijah did not expe-
rience hunger.128 For in one instance, he was fed by an angel,
and went forth on the strength of that food and survived for
forty days and forty nights.129 But at another time, he was fed
through the assistance of ravens, when they brought bread to
him in the morning and meat in the evening and he is also
said to have drunk repeatedly from the stream of Cherith;130
and when he encountered a widow during the time of fam-
ine in Zarephath in Sidon,131 because he was a just man, he
did not suffer starvation from the famine. But everywhere an
abundance was available to him, while at the same time sin-
ners were experiencing famine. But because Elijah was just, he
did not know hunger.
So, then, even if famine should someday come—may the
Lord protect his Church from this—nevertheless, if and when
it happens,132 the one who possesses understanding and who is
trained in meditation upon God’s word and continues to med-
itate on his Law day and night,133 and who trains himself to
grasp its spiritual meaning, this person will discover in these134
the bread that comes down from heaven,135 and the Word of
God will become abundant food and flowing drink for him,
126. Cf. Am 5.13.
127. Cf. Lk 4.25.
128. Non patiebatur famem: playing on the two senses of fames as “hunger” and
“famine.”
129. Cf. 1 Kgs 19.8.
130. Cf. 1 Kgs 17.6.
131. Cf. 1 Kgs 17.10–24.
132. More literally, “if it ever happens.”
133. Cf. Ps 1.2.
134. In his; the antecedent(s) could be either lex and verbum Dei or intellectum
and exercitium; the former pair seems more likely.
135. Cf. Jn 6.41, 50.
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 127

and not food and drink only, but—if he is capable of examin-

ing thoroughly the deeper mysteries of spiritual understand-
ing136 —the words of God will be for him a delight.
Further, a deeper meaning can be uncovered in this pas-
sage in another way. The Lord and Savior stated: “Night will
come, when no one is able to work.”137 He is speaking about
that time which will come after this age, the time when each
individual will receive punishments for his evil deeds. He then
speaks about that night which is to come, when one can no
longer do any work, but each individual will then be fed from
the works which he accomplished while here in this life.138 But
when it is night, no one works at that evil time. While sinners
are afflicted with punishments, there will doubtless be fam-
ine for those who gathered no fruits of good work. But in that
time of famine, the just will be filled,139 with the fruits, that is,
of their justice.
For just as they gathered manna in the desert for six days,
but on the sixth day, they gathered not one day’s amount, but
as much as would be enough for the next day and each one ate
on the Sabbath day what had been gathered on the sixth,140 so
also now the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and this time of
his economy,141 which he accomplished by his Passion in this
age, must be considered a kind of “sixth day.” And so while we
are in the sixth day, let us gather double the manna, so that it
might be enough for us when the authentic observance of the
Sabbath arrives for the people of God. For if we fail to gather
double the amount of food, to sustain us both in the present
age and in the age to come, we will not be filled during the
days of famine.
For while the just will thus be filled in the days of famine, sin-
ners—it says—will perish. But the enemies of the Lord, as quickly as
they be honored and exalted, will pass away as smoke passes away.142
136. Profundiora sacramenta mysticae intellegentiae.
137. Jn 9.4.
138. Hic positus operatus est.
139. Cf. Ps 36.19.
140. Cf. Ex 16.21–26.
141. Dispensationis = οἰκονομίας.
142. Ps 36.19–20.
128 ORIGEN

The divine Scriptures teach us the value of this world’s honors.

When you see an individual swollen with the authority he has
received over a particular province, or another who has become
haughty with consulships, or another puffed up with various
magistracies, when, then, you see all this haughtiness, consider
that they will pass away as smoke passes away. Recall how many
men you have seen in these positions of honor (even right up
to your own day) and remember how great were the heights
they reached, and see if nearly all of them have not, following
their exaltation, passed away as smoke, thrown and cast down
to where they had started. But the enemies of the Lord, as quickly
as they be honored and exalted, will pass away as smoke passes away.
On the other hand, the friends of the Lord, as quickly as they
are rejected, despised, and humiliated by men, will be exalted
and raised up by God, for “everyone who exalts himself will be
humbled, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”143
11. Following this, certain other things are added that re-
quire considerable explanation, for it says, The sinner will bor-
row and not return, but the just one shows mercy and lends.144 This
too, if we take it literally, will not seem true. For many sinners
borrow money from one another and return it with interest,
so that they themselves might also make a profit now and then
from the money that they had invested.145 The prophet clar-
ifies this when he says, The sinner will borrow and not repay.146 But
if you understand who it is who loans at interest and who it is
who receives the interest and if you ask who the sinner is who
does not return the money he has borrowed, you will under-
stand that what is written makes sense.147
For example, when Paul teaches and his hearers heed him,
Paul is the one who lends the Lord’s money at interest, while
his hearers are those who receive from his mouth the money
of the Word lent at interest. Indeed, if the person who receives
143. Lk 14.11.
144. Ps 36.21.
145. Sumpserant; taking the verb in a pregnant sense; cf. OLD s.v. § 9.
146. Ps 36.21; in this second occurrence of this verse Rufinus has solvet for
reddet.
147. Intelleges consequentiam [= ἀκολουθίαν] habere quod scriptum est. Cf. Hom in
Ps 38.2.6 [SC 411.388], where ordo perhaps renders ἀκολουθία.
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 129

money from him is just, he will pay the interest in full and say,
“You gave me five coins;148 see, I have made five more.”149 If he
is just, he says, “You gave me five talents; see, you have ten”; or,
“You gave me two talents; see, you have four.”150 But if he is a
sinner, he fails to produce, on the basis of the Word of God he
has received, the works entrusted151 to him, and will return no
interest, but he uses up everything he received in loan.
Now see that all of you, to whom I am speaking these things,
are receiving my words as money on loan; this money belongs
to the Lord. But if you doubt this, listen to the prophet who
says, “The words of the Lord are pure words, silver tested by
fire, purged of dross, and refined seven times.”152 If I teach bad-
ly, therefore, my money is counterfeit, just like those to whom
it was said, “Your silver is counterfeit.”153 But if I teach well, the
money or silver is not my own, but it belongs to the Lord, and
it has been tested. So I am allowed to make a loan to you of
the Lord’s money, but not of money belonging to me, for the
Word of the Lord prohibits making loans of human money at
interest.154
What, then, is human money, and what is money belong-
ing to the Lord? I think that the word of Valentinus is human
money and that it is counterfeit; further, the word of Marcion
and Basilides is human money and is counterfeit; the word
of all the heretics is not tested money, nor does it have on it-
self the image of the Lord intact,155 but rather an altered one,

148. Quinque mnas; the μνᾶ or mina is equivalent to 100 drachmas.

149. Cf. Lk 19.18.
150. Cf. Mt 25.20, 22.
151. Opera mandati [ei]; OLD, s.v. mandatum § 2, a legal meaning including a
consensual contract, agreement, or commission.
152. Ps 11.7.
153. Cf. Jer 6.30.
154. Affirming the early Christian abhorrence of usury; cf. Lv 25.37; Dt
23.20.
155. Nec dominicam integre in se habet figuram. A similar metaphor is used by
Irenaeus v­ is-à-vis faulty (Gnostic) readings of Scripture; cf. Adversus haereses 1.8.6
[SC 264.112–116]; because they lack the correct ὑπόθεσις of the Scriptures, the
true image of the king is lost in the mosaic and hence misrepresented by the
erroneous manipulation of the pieces. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.4.4 [SC 411.214–216]
where the haereticorum verba . . . et doctrina are juxtaposed to the Lord’s “money”:
130 ORIGEN

which was fabricated, so to speak, outside the mint, since it

was produced outside of the Church.156 If, however, you see
someone who is speaking openly not his own words, but God’s
words, one who is truly bold in saying, “Do you ask for proof
of Christ who is speaking in me?”157 know that this one indeed
is lending not his own, but the Lord’s money, and he is doing
what is written, All day long he shows mercy and lends,158 for he
possesses the authority to make loans, which has been given to
him by my God159 Jesus Christ himself.
For he is the Lord who, in the parable, says to his servants
to whom money had been entrusted, “Go, do business with it
until I return.”160 And he says to that servant who had neglect-
ed to increase the money, “You should have given my money
to bankers, and on my return I would have gotten it back with
interest.”161 This, then, is the sinner who borrows and does not
repay. The just person, however, will give back the money he
received with interest, meaning that he gives back with works
the Word of God he has received.
You hear a sermon on chastity, you warmly praise the teach-
er, you embrace the teaching, you admire the advice; through
all these you have received the “money” of chastity. If you are a
sinner, though, once you have left church, you put yourself right
back into the business of this world: wantonness takes hold of
you, drunkenness follows, and faithless conversations with cor-

Orate ergo ut haec nostra pecunia quam vobis feneramus tota inveniatur ex iustis labori-
bus, tota de dominica moneta procedens ut et vos fenus integrum consignetis et nos non
audiamus quia “Oportuit te pecuniam meam dare nummulariis.”
156. This theme recurs in Hom in Ps 36.4.4 [SC 411.214]. Ignatius of An-
tioch had used the imagery of two “coinages” to distinguish those belonging
to God and those belonging to the world: νομίσματα δύο, ὁ μὲν θεοῦ, ὁ δὲ κόσμου
τούτου; Magnesians 5.2 [SC 10bis.98].
157. 2 Cor 13.3.
158. Ps 36.26.
159. Origen is fond, in his preaching, of referring to Jesus as “my Lord Je-
sus” or even “my Jesus”; here the Munich Manuscript reads ὁ ἐμὸς κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς
Χριστός [GCS n.f. 19.155], a formula found also in Hom in Lev 9.5 [SC 287.92];
cf. Hom in Luc 12.1 [SC 87.198] and 18.1 [SC 87.264] and see de Lubac, History
and Spirit, 65–66.
160. Lk 19.13.
161. Mt 25.27.
 HOMILY 3, PSALM 36 [37] 131

rupt men. Having immediately forgotten all that you had re-
ceived from the teacher, what you had praised, what you had
admired, you fall headlong once again into lewd company162
and have become the sinner who has borrowed the word of
chastity163 and does not return the works of chastity.
Similarly, if you hear a word of justice in church, and upon
leaving, a neighbor whose field you had coveted meets you,
and immediately forgetting what was said in church, in order
to satisfy your avarice, you take possession of what is not your
own, and so, having borrowed from justice, you do not return
interest on the loan, while you do not carry out deeds of jus-
tice. And so in each of these cases, The sinner borrows and does
not repay, but the just one shows mercy and lends.164 Not only, it
says, does the just person make loans, that is, not only does he
preach the word, not only does he instruct the ignorant, but he
also shows mercy toward the weak. For he follows the example
of the Lord, who says, “I desire mercy more than sacrifice.”165
12. For those who bless him will inherit the land. But those who
curse him will be wiped out.166 Those who bless him, that is, those
who bless the just person, will inherit the land. What land? They
will inherit that good land, that abundant land flowing with
milk and honey,167 where those good things are which are truly
good; they will possess it, those who bless the just person, but
those who curse him will be wiped out. Yet to you it seems like no
serious matter to speak ill, from time to time, concerning the
saints, and like a mere trifle for you to say about the servants of
God: “That one is a s­ uch-and-such,” and “That one is a fraud,”
and “That one loves the world,” or “That one is a poseur.” Do
you not hear that those who curse the just one will be wiped out?
But if this seems like something trivial to you, listen to God
speaking in another place to the just person: “But I will be an
enemy to your enemies, and I will oppose those who oppose

162. Ad impudica rursum devolveris scorta.

163. A descriptive genitive.
164. Ps 36.21.
165. Mt 9.13; cf. Hos 6.6.
166. Ps 36.22.
167. Cf. Ex 3.8, 17.
132 ORIGEN

you.”168 You see how dangerous it is to be an enemy to the just

or to speak ill of the saints. For if we really believe what the
Lord said about every single one of his servants, namely, “I was
hungry and you did not give me to eat,” and what he adds,
saying, “Who” did “this to one of these least of mine,” did “it
to me,”169 it makes sense that he would also say, “It is you who
were cursing me, who kept disparaging me and speaking false-
ly against me and making accusations against me.” And if we
should say, “Lord, when did we curse you or disparage you?
When did we speak falsely against you?” then he will say to us,
“Amen, I say to you, that when you did it to one of these least
of mine, you did it to me.”170
For just as in giving to eat to one of these, you have done so
to me, and in giving to drink to one of these, you have given to
me, and just as in clothing one of these, you have clothed me;
so too in cursing one of these, you have cursed me; and if you
have blessed or honored one of these, you have blessed and
honored me, just as elsewhere he says nothing less: “The one
who receives you, receives me,”171 and, “The one who rejects
you, rejects me.”172
For this reason, then, let us curb our tongue, and let us re-
gard the servants of the Lord with admiration; let us bless the
just and never disparage them; let us not open our mouth to
speak ill, lest perhaps we be wiped out; but let us bless, that we
ourselves might obtain blessing through Christ our Lord, to
whom are “glory and power for ever and ever.”173 Amen.

168. Ex 23.22.
169. Mt 25.40–42.
170. Mt 25.40.
171. Mt 10.40.
172. Lk 10.16.
173. Rv 5.13.
HOMILY 4, PSALM 36 [37]

F OU RT H HOM I LY ON P S A L M 3 6 [37 ]

HE STEPS OF MAN are guided, it says, by the Lord.1 And

at another point in this very Psalm it speaks about
the steps of the just person in this way: The law of his
God is in his heart, and his steps will not be tripped up.2 But also
in the ­seventy-second Psalm it is said: “My steps have almost
been wasted.”3 Thus we use the noun “steps” (gressus) from the
verb “to take steps” (gradiendo), just as it is written in Exodus
that Moses saw a flame of fire and an angel when the bush was
burning but was not consumed, and he said: “Stepping by it”—
or passing by it—“I will take a look at this great sight.”4 Draw-
ing on this passage, we have an opportunity to understand the
matters at hand.5
So in terms of the passage in Exodus that we have just
called to mind, namely, “Stepping by it, I will take a look at
this great sight,” I heard a certain individual from among the
wise men who came before us, when explaining this passage,
say that it is impossible at first for one who is fixed in the daily

1. Ps 36.23.
2. Ps 36.31.
3. Ps 72.2b.
4. Ex 3.2–3 [LXX]: ὤφθη δὲ αυτῷ ἄγγελος κυρίου ἐν φλογὶ πυρὸς ἐκ τοῦ βάτου
. . . εἶπεν δὲ Μωυσῆς Παρελθὼν ὄψομαι τὸ ὅραμα τὸ μέγα τοῦτο. In the Munich Man-
uscript, Origen’s Greek has διαβάς where the LXX reads παρελθών [GCS n.f.
19.157]. The slightly awkward English “stepping by” is used here and following
primarily because Origen wants his hearers to see the link between the verb
“stepping” (διαβαίνειν /gradior) and the noun “steps” (διαβήματα / gressus), which
is important for his exegesis of the Psalm text. The Latin of Rufinus replicates
the etymological relation of διαβαίνειν and διαβήματα; the latter is used in the
LXX text of Ps 36.31.
5. This is one of the foundational interpretive principles in Origen and in
the Fathers generally: using Scripture to interpret Scripture.

133
134 ORIGEN

life and activities of this world to look at a great sight—that is,

to gaze upon and to examine closely great mysteries. Rather,
it is necessary first to move beyond6 all these things and to
transcend all things of this world, and to have our understand-
ing and our mind set free, and then to arrive at a view of great
and spiritual realities and in this way at long last to see a great
sight. He was speaking in explanation of this very passage that
we have just called to mind. But we, who are eager in accord
with the admonitions of the Scriptures to praise the words of
wise men and to add to them,7 are capable of adding some-
thing similar to what he said.
Every individual who makes his way toward virtue makes
progress by walking, so that, through many stages of progress
along the way, little by little he arrives at virtue.8 Thus, mak-
ing his way and, as it were, stepping along 9 by certain steps,
he always steps past and goes beyond10 those things that he
has mastered,11 and, letting go of the things that lie behind
him, he stretches himself toward those things that lie before
him.12
As he steps past, then, he moves first beyond the place of
wickedness, and from there, making progress by steps or stag-
es, he then passes other spiny thickets of sins, next the jagged
rocks of iniquity, and the steep and slippery slopes of the vices.
But when he has gone even beyond these, always stretching
himself toward what lies before him, what remains is only a
little wickedness, and all else bodes well for his journey, if, that

6. Transire.
7. Cf. Prv 1.5–6; 9.9. Note the impersonal construction: Nos vero quibus stadi-
um . . . laudare et addere.
8. Origen’s lengthy treatment in Hom in Num 27 [SC 461.270–346] of the
various mansiones of the Israelites on their way to the Promised Land is apposite
to these “steps.”
9. Digreditur, rendering διαβαίνων.
10. Transit.
11. Ea quae explicuit: literally, “which he has set in order”; Crouzel simply uses
the French cognate and has (ambiguously) “il dépasse toujours et va a­ u-delà
de ce qu’il a expliqué . . .” [SC 411.182–183]. The idea, of course, is that one
making progress does not merely become complacent in his progress, but keeps
moving.
12. Cf. Phil 3.13; we see here Origen’s understanding of Paul’s ἐπέκτασις.
 HOMILY 4, PSALM 36 [37] 135

is, while making his way, he keeps careful watch over his steps
so as not to slip, bypassing every single place of wickedness so
as not to dash his foot on it,13 so that, as it is written in Exodus,
he can see a great sight.14 For no one who is still in the midst
of wickedness and who has not stepped around or bypassed
it will be able to gaze fully at that great sight of the hidden
things of God, which is to say, of Knowledge and of Wisdom.15
It is a great sight, when God is seen by a pure heart.16 It is a
great sight, when his Christ is recognized by a pure heart as
the Word of God and the Wisdom of God.17 It is a great sight
to recognize and to believe in the Holy Spirit. This great sight,
then, is the knowledge of the Trinity.
Nevertheless, in Exodus Moses too saw then a great sight,
and it is said that it was an angel who was seen in the burning
bush,18 and he calls that “a great sight.” For he understood
who was in the angel. Indeed, he told him right away, “I am,”
he said, “the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the
God of Jacob.”19 See, then, how great a sight this is, although it
is itself a great thing to know that God “makes his angels spir-
its and his servants a burning fire.”20 And then, to be sure, this
vision wherein an angel is said to appear to him was a great
sight for Moses while still shepherding his ­father-in-law Jethro’s
sheep; but he even steps by or goes beyond these tasks.21 But
if he also crossed the Red Sea and the pillar of cloud covered
him22 and he worshiped the mysteries of what was to come, 23
then too will he be able to see an even greater sight. For he
will enter the darkness and the cloud, where God himself is re-

13. Cf. Ps 90.2.

14. Cf. Ex 3.3.
15. Cf. Col 2.3; 1 Cor 1.24.
16. Cf. Mt 5.8.
17. Cf. 1 Cor 1.24.
18. In rubo in igne; cf. Ex 3.2.
19. Ex 3.6.
20. Ps 103.4.
21. et digredienti vel transeunti ab his. Origen seems to be playing on the words;
Moses leaves these tasks behind as he moves forward following God’s call.
22. Cf. Ex 14.20.
23. Cf. 1 Cor 10.3–11.
136 ORIGEN

ported to be,24 where it is written that Moses alone approached

God, while the others stood far off.25
Moses makes such progress through these great sights
that he says to God, “If,” he said, “I have found grace in your
sight, show yourself to me that I might see you clearly.” 26
Then he hears this from God: “I will put you in the cleft of
the rock”27—“but the rock was Christ”28 —so that through the
cleft “you might,” for an instant, “see my back,” that is, so that
you might recognize the things that are to be fulfilled in the
end times through the Incarnation, 29 “but my face you will be
unable to see.”30
But taking leave of so many sights,31 let us turn now to what
we set out to consider from the Psalm, namely, its saying that
the steps of man are guided by the Lord.32 We have explained ear-
lier the path one is to travel toward virtue: that there are many
things that the one who makes his way toward virtue should
step around and bypass. So then, you too who are heading to-
ward Christ,33 who is the Power of God, 34 step around excess,
lewd company, adultery; step around theft, false witness; next,
step around both greed and all desire for money and other
bad things; step around wrath; step around envy, because of
which the earth first tasted human blood;35 step around false-
hood; step around the sadness of the world. Unless you step
around all these things, you will not be able to see that great
sight of the Lord.
There are, then, within us certain steps and feet by which
we make this journey; there are steps of the inner man by
which we can walk through that Way who says, “I am the Way,
24. Cf. Ex 19.16–25.
25. Cf. Ex 20.21.
26. Ex 33.13.
27. Ex 33.22.
28. 1 Cor 10.4.
29. Per assumptionem carnis.
30. Ex 33.23.
31. Sed digressi quamplurimas visiones: a pun on digredior.
32. Ps 36.23.
33. Cf. Phil 3.13.
34. Cf. 1 Cor 1.24.
35. Gn 4.11.
 HOMILY 4, PSALM 36 [37] 137

the Truth, and the Life.”36 We who make this journey must
use many steps in order to bypass all those things we have just
spoken of, for, The steps of man are guided by the Lord.37
The desire to carry this out is alone insufficient for the one
who wishes to set out on this journey, if the Lord does not also
guide his steps. For it frequently happens that those making
their way do indeed walk, but they are incapable of keeping
to the straight path, but fall into some kind of error, such as
those who are engaged in philosophical study: they certainly
seem to be setting out on the journey toward virtue, but be-
cause their steps are not guided by the Lord, they do not stay
on the straight path. But this is no less true of the heretics, who
also make their way, but since they understand the Scriptures
in a fleshly, not a spiritual, way, they turn off to the left. If they
do possess a spiritual understanding, but do not hold fast to the
rule of apostolic truth in that very spiritual understanding, they
fall off to the right, as the devil, so to speak, does not guide
their steps but diverts them from the straight path.38
We, therefore, “turning off neither to the right nor to the
left,”39 advance along the middle Way, which is Christ the
Lord,40 because the Lord guides the steps of those who walk
upon him. By the Lord, then, are the steps of man guided, and he
will long for his way,41 the Way, that is, of which we spoke before.
For the one who is guided by God will long for Christ and will
desire to remain always in Christ.
2. When he falls, it says, he will not be thrown into confusion.42
Saying earlier that his steps are guided by the Lord,43 here it
36. Jn 14.6; cf. Hom in Ps 36.5.1 [SC 411.226].
37. Ps 36.23.
38. The first type of heretic might be the Marcionites, who reject the Old
Testament; the second, Gnostics who might allegorize but do not possess the
rule of faith and thus are incapable of understanding correctly the “spiritual”
sense of the Scriptures.
39. Nm 20.17.
40. Origen says something quite similar in his massive Comm in Jn 19.38:
“Our Savior is the whole of the steps” to God; quoted in John Behr, The Way to
Nicaea (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001), 183.
41. Ps 36.23.
42. Ps 36.24.
43. Ps 36.23.
138 ORIGEN

speaks about his fall. Note, then, that even those who have set
out on this journey sometimes happen to fall, even those who
are guided by the Lord. But there is a significant difference
between the fall of the just and the fall of the unjust.
When the just one falls, it says, he does not remain down.
The unjust and the one who has not placed his hope in God, if
he falls, remains down and does not get up; that is, if he sins,
does not repent of his sin and is not capable of reform.44 But
the just person, even if he gives offense in some way, whether
by word—for it is an apostle who says, “For we all give offense
in many ways, and if someone does not give offense by word,
he is a perfect man”45 —even the just one, then, gives offense
by word, but perhaps from time to time also by deed, but he
knows his need for reform; he knows he needs to correct him-
self. He who had said, “I do not know the man,”46 a short time
later, having received a look from the Lord, knows he should
weep most bitterly.47 He who had spied a woman from the
roof and had lusted after her also knows he should say, “I have
sinned, I have sinned against you alone, and I have done evil
in your sight.”48 If, then, the just one does not remain down
when he falls, he will not remain in sin, but he will quickly
spring back up, like a doe from a snare or a bird from a trap.49
But the unjust individual will not only persist, but will also re-
main down, in his sins.
But what does the just one do? The law of his God is in his
heart, and his steps will not be tripped up (supplantabuntur). 50
There it said, The steps of man are guided by the Lord,51 but here it
says, the steps of the just will not be tripped up, for the Lord, it says,

44. Et peccatum suum emendare nescit, taking nescire = non posse here; cf. OLD
s.v. § 3a, and taking the following instances of scit to mean “knows the need for”
more than “knows how to,” especially in light of the play on nescire and scit when
invoking Mt 26.72.
45. Jas 3.2.
46. Mt 26.72.
47. Cf. Lk 22.61–62.
48. Ps 50.6.
49. Cf. Is 13.14; Ps 123.7.
50. Ps 36.31.
51. Ps 36.23.
 HOMILY 4, PSALM 36 [37] 139

strengthens his hands. 52 In another Psalm, namely Psalm 72, it

says, “My feet nearly slipped.”53 This, I think, should be un-
derstood in a similar fashion. For we who are making progress
toward virtue make our way in a kind of ascent; if someone
slips and falls in this ascent, he loses the progress he made on
the way up. Thus his steps have been wasted.
This is, however, what occurs when one turns back after hav-
ing made progress: just as it happened also to the wife of Lot,
who was headed in the right direction in her departure from
Sodom and who, in her escape from the punishments of the
wicked, was making progress and going up to the mountain
where she was headed under the guidance of an angel; but
because she acted against the command of God—for she had
been directed not to look back nor to stop in that region, 54 but
to go up to the mountain and there be kept safe—when she
turned and looked back at what was behind, there her steps
were wasted, and she lost all progress gained before she had
veered from her course. 55 She remained right there, having
been turned into a statuette of salt. 56 This is what the Lord is
talking about in the Gospel: “No one who puts his hand to the
plow and looks back is fit for the Kingdom of God.”57
Do you want me to show you others as well whose steps have
been wasted? Remember those who passed through the Red
Sea as if it were dry land but who, when they sinned, fell in the
desert and it was there that their steps were wasted. But now,
too, it could happen that one who has lived a celibate life for
three or four years (or even more), or someone else who has
52. Ps 36.24.
53. Ps 72.2a: mei autem pene moti sunt pedes [SC 411.190]; initially, Rufinus
had quoted Ps 72.2b, paulominus effusi sunt gressus mei [SC 411.180] (see above,
p. 133 n. 3).
54. Cf. Gn 19.17.
55. Digressa; one wonders if this should not be conjecturally emended to de-
gressa (while the apparatus offers no variants, the two words are frequently con-
fused in the manuscripts), thus meaning “went off course” or “departed from
the original plan.”
56. Cf. Gn 19.26; this interpretation is less benign than that offered by Ire-
naeus, for whom Lot’s wife becomes a type of the Church; cf. Adversus haereses
4.31.3 [SC 100.794]. (I am grateful to Robin Darling Young for this reference.)
57. Lk 9.62.
140 ORIGEN

devoted himself to the study of the Word and of doctrine and

to the works of wisdom, but if this one later on is overcome
and crosses over to the lust of the flesh, or turns aside to other
sins, or hands himself over to the life of the world or turns
back around58 to the business and riches of this corruptible
life, you would not hesitate to say of him that his steps have
been wasted.
Let us, then, pray the Lord to guide our steps and keep our
ways, that our steps might not be tripped up, that our footsteps
might be made strong on the Way upon which we set out—that
is, upon Christ our Lord—as if upon firm rock, that we might
be incapable of being tripped up in any way; tripped up, that
is, by him whose head we watch for and who watches for our
heel, 59 to whom we should never reveal our bare sole. Rath-
er, we ought always to have our “feet shod in preparation for
the Gospel of peace,”60 so that, if the devil, the one who trips
us up, comes and finds our feet protected and standing upon
rock, he will be unable to trip us from there.
For although we said earlier that a kind of fall is possible and
that a lapse can happen to those who follow the path of virtue,
it should nevertheless be noted that in the passage where it said,
When he falls, he will not remain down,61 what it had asserted earli-
er was not so much about the just man as about “man” without
any specification.62 For it says: The steps of man are guided by the

58. Transeat . . . transferat . . . [se] convertat: an interesting series of verbs other-

wise used positively above; perhaps this is “­tongue-in-cheek.”
59. Cf. Gn 3.15.
60. Eph 6.15.
61. Ps 36.24: cum ceciderit, non prosternitur; earlier, at the beginning of 2 [SC
411.188], he quotes non conturbabitur (= “he will not be thrown into confusion”);
the Stuttgart Vulgate reads non adlidetur (iuxta Hebr) and non conlidetur (iuxta
LXX), while both the Clementine and ­Neo-Vulgate read non collidetur; the LXX
reads οὐ καταραχθήσεται (= “he will not be cast down completely”), also found
in the Munich Manuscript; this gloss reveals that Origen understands “being
tripped up” as equivalent to staying down once one falls, as will become clear
below.
62. De homine puro; the Latin is ambiguous. Prinzivalli, Origene, Omelie sui Sal-
mi (1991), 181, renders this “l’uomo puro e semplice”; Crouzel [SC 411.195],
“l’homme en général.” Cf. OLD s.v. purus § 10–11. The Munich Manuscript
reads: περὶ ἀνθρώπου ὁ λόγος ἐστὶ τοῦ μήπω δικαίου, “this passage concerns the man
 HOMILY 4, PSALM 36 [37] 141

Lord, and he will long for his way; when he falls, he will not remain
down.63 In this it is shown that there are some falls that never-
theless do not necessarily indicate that the one who has fallen is
overcome or downed.64 For just as often happens in an athletic
contest,65 while two are engaged in a wrestling match, indeed
one falls initially, but, although he has fallen, he gets up and
wins, so also in our contest, which for us is against the prince
of this world,66 if it happens that one of us is overcome and falls
into some sin, it is possible after the sin for one to come to his
senses, get up, and recoil from the evil that he committed and
not only restrain himself in the future but also make satisfac-
tion to God, every night bathing his bed and moistening his
covers with tears,67 gaining confidence from the authority of
the prophet where it is said: “Will the one who falls not go on to
get up? Or the one who has turned away, will he not turn back?
Woe to those who have turned away with a stubborn apostasy,
says the Lord.”68 This is the one who was indeed capable of fall-
ing, but was not able to stay down.
But if you see someone who has fallen into a particular sin
and who, after falling, loses hope of conversion and says, “How
can I, who have fallen, now be saved? Now there is no hope,
my sins hem me in, how can I dare to approach the Lord? How
can I return to church?” And if someone like this should, out
of this desperation, draw away even from God, then not only
has he fallen, but in his fall he has been downed and is indeed
overwhelmed.
It is certainly desirable that the athlete of piety and virtue69
who is not yet justified.” It is possible that by the contrast of purus and iustus
Rufinus is anticipating a distinction that Origen makes in a subsequent homily
between one who is making progress (qui proficit) and one who has been made
perfect (perfectus); cf. Hom in Ps 38.1.5 [SC 411.346], pp. 209–10 below.
63. Ps 36.23–24.
64. Prostratum, in an attempt to keep the perfect passive participle of prosterno
of the Psalm verse.
65. In agone.
66. Cf. Eph 6.12 and Jn 12.31.
67. Cf. Ps 6.7.
68. Jer 8.4–5.
69. Origen elsewhere describes Job, in his grappling with Satan, as τῆς ἀρετῆς
ἀθλητής; cf. De oratione 30.2 [GCS 3.394]; in Hom in Luc 9.2 [SC 87.176] he
142 ORIGEN

remain always unyielding so that he lose not one match, so to

speak, nor bend nor be tripped up. But if this does not happen
and it turns out that he does fall, he should not lie prostrate
after the fall (lest he stay down), but get up and correct his
mistake, and by the satisfaction of his own penance make up
for what he had done wrong, so that the Apostle should not say
in his regard: “I mourn for many of those who have previously
sinned and have not repented of the impurity and fornication
and the shameful things they have done.”70 Moreover, why did
the Apostle take up examples from a wrestling match when
he says, “No one is crowned except the one who has compet-
ed lawfully,”71 unless he wanted us to know the struggles and
contests of the Law? He also said concerning himself, “I fight,
though not as one striking the air.”72 And again, “I have fought
the good fight.”73
Because, then, a struggle and a contest have been set be-
fore us, we should also know the contest of the Law. There
are athletes who conquer and win the crown in every contest.
They win in the boys’ class (παῖδας); they win when in the ad-
olescents’ class (ἀγενείους); they win when facing grown men
(ἄνδρας).74 Others are overcome when facing grown men, but
they receive the crown in the adolescents’ class, yet they some-
times also win in the grown men’s class. Therefore, some al-
ways receive a crown, but others receive a crown on the second
or third attempt.75 It is certainly embarrassing and the worst
of luck not to win even one crown in all these contests so var-
ious and diverse. So, then, the Christian too, for whom “the
struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against principal-
ities and powers and against the rulers of this world of dark-
describes the gestation of John the Baptist as exercise in anticipation of the
contest.
70. 2 Cor 12.21.
71. 2 Tm 2.5.
72. 1 Cor 9.26.
73. 2 Tm 4.7.
74. Cf. Hom in Lev 16.1 [SC 287.262] and Ambrose, Explanatio Psalmi 36.52
[CSEL 64.110–111], where such “classes” of contestants are spoken of as relative
to the Christian agon.
75. Aliquanti secundo vel tertio coronantur; alternately, “certain others receive a
crown in the second or third class.”
 HOMILY 4, PSALM 36 [37] 143

ness, against the spirits of wickedness in the heavens,”76 in the

face of so many adversaries such as these, should be vigilant, if
he can, like a contestant, so that, as often as he competes, he
might always win and immediately take first place77 among the
παῖδας, that is, among the children.
Do you want me to show you some who received the crown
among the children, that is, at the very beginning of child-
hood?78 Look at blessed Daniel, who from his childhood ob-
tained the grace of prophecy, and in proving the wickedness
of the old men, as a boy he won the crown of justice and chas-
tity.79 Do you want me to show you another who was crowned
in the boys’ class? Consider Jeremiah, who, when he excused
himself from prophesying on account of his young age, heard
from the Lord: “Do not say, ‘I am a child,’ for you will go to
whomever I send you, and you will say whatever I tell you.”80
But perhaps these seem to you as if they are already adults.
I will give you an athlete who engaged in a contest and won
a victory even before he uttered infant cries in the hearing
of men.81 Jacob, still within his mother’s womb, wrestled with
his brother, Esau, grasped his foot,82 and won the victory;83 be-
cause of this, he received from his parent the blessings of the
firstborn, which belonged to the brother who was tripped up
and overcome. Moreover, does it not seem to you that those
children also, who “at the age of two and under” received the
palm of martyrdom in Bethlehem for the sake of the Lord’s
name,84 were also crowned in a children’s contest? See how
many examples we have of crowns in the boys’ class!
76. Eph 6.12.
77. Primas . . . coronas.
78. In primo statim lacte, literally, “in the first milk”; cf. Lewis and Short, s.v.,
for similar uses of lac.
79. Cf. Dn 13.45–64; Daniel figures among the “athletes of piety” Origen
adduces as examples in his Ex ad Mart 33 [GCS 2.28–29].
80. Jer 1.7.
81. Inter homines, the phrase rendered above as “when facing grown men”
and “in the grown men’s class.” See p. 142.
82. Supplantavit; here the use of this verb is quite literal and most apposite
in context.
83. Cf. Gn 25.22–24.
84. Cf. Mt 2.16.
144 ORIGEN

We have returned to an explanation of that short verse

which says when he falls, he will not remain down.85 It goes on
to state the reason why he does not remain down when it says,
because the Lord strengthens his hands.86 Notice how it speaks in
sequence concerning each thing: so that he might not fall, it
says, the Lord guides his steps, but if he should fall, he will
not remain down: The Lord—it says—strengthens his hand.87 You
see, therefore, we are always in need of the Lord’s help. First,
so that we might not fall, but then, if we do fall, so that we
might also get up.88
3. I was young and have grown old, and I have not seen the just
man abandoned, nor his offspring seeking bread. All day he is merci-
ful and lends, and his offspring will be a blessing.89 Those who say
without qualification90 that the words of the divine Scriptures
are to be taken literally 91 will doubtless say that in this passage
David is confirming that, now that the time of his youth had
passed (since he had already reached old age), in all that time
he had never seen the just man abandoned to the extent that
he was in need of bread.
What are we to make of the fact that the apostle Paul, while
detailing and describing the lives of the prophets, says that
they were in need, suffered trials, and wandered about in goat-
skins through rocky caverns and caves92—and, in regard to
himself, recalls that he was often hungry and thirsty?93 Since
we realize from the scriptural accounts that the just frequently

85. Ps 36.24.
86. Ibid.
87. The text here employs the singular manum.
88. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.3.8 [SC 411.154], in explaining Ps 144.14: Suffulcit
Dominus omnes qui cadunt et erigit Dominus omnes elisos. Tantum est ut nos exsper-
giscamur aliquando et evigilemus, ut si quando per infirmitatem casus aliquis imminet,
deprecemur Dominum ut mittat nobis verbum suum et sapientiam suam, quae suffulciat
casuros et erigat. See p. 122 above.
89. Ps 36.25–26.
90. Simpliciter; rendering ἁπλῶς, a reference to their reading of the text; see
below, the next paragraph.
91. Secundum historiam, rendering κατὰ συντυχίαν.
92. Cf. Heb 11.36–38; cf. Hom in Ps 37.1.6 [SC 411.294].
93. Cf. 2 Cor 11.27.
 HOMILY 4, PSALM 36 [37] 145

suffer these things, how can it now be thought that David said
these things according to the simple meaning?94
But let us see if there are not perhaps certain “ages” of our
inner man like those of the outer, bodily man.95 This is why
from time to time it is said to men who are already mature that
they are boys, and to others that they are young men, and to
others that they are old men, and in any case it makes no sense
that these things are said in terms of bodily age. Indeed, while
many prior to Abraham lived six hundred or five hundred or at
the least surely three hundred years, it was not said concerning
any of these that he was older and full of days, except Abraham
alone.96 From this it must be understood that this is a designa-
tion not of bodily age, but of the maturity of the inner man. For
this reason, we too should want to be called presbyters and el-
ders not on the basis of bodily age, nor on the basis of the office
of presbyter, but on the basis of the perfect understanding and
seriousness of purpose of the inner man, just as Abraham, too,
was called an elder, having reached an honorable old age.
In terms of the inner man, then, there is a kind of child’s
age, and also a young man’s age and an old man’s age, in ref-
erence to which the Apostle also said, “When I was a child,
I spoke as a child, thought as a child, reasoned as a child; but
when I became a man, I put away the things proper to a child.”97
It is my understanding, then, that these things were said by the
Apostle not in reference to bodily age, but because when he
first came to faith, he was a ­newborn child, desiring “spiritual
milk without guile”;98 at that point he was understanding the
Scriptures as a child, and thinking about the Gospel as a child,
and reasoning as a child. But later, as he was growing in age

94. Secundum simplicem intellectum (= [intellectus] secundum historiam above; see

notes 90 and 91). Since, on the basis of the historical testimony of the Scrip-
tures, this passage of the Psalm is patently untrue, Origen wants his hearers to
seek its deeper meaning.
95. Cf. Origen’s comments in his Comm in Cant, pr. 2.7 [SC 375.94–96],
where the “ages” of the inner man are discussed.
96. Cf. Gn 25.8.
97. 1 Cor 13.11; “child” here rendering parvulus, but of course “boy” would
also be acceptable.
98. 1 Pt 2.2.
146 ORIGEN

toward the likeness of Christ, about whom it was written that

“he grew in age and wisdom and grace before God and men,”99
he was putting away the things proper to a child; and it is for
this reason that he said, “When I became a man, I put away the
things proper to a child.”100 Therefore, when David said, “I was
young and have grown old,”101 it must be understood in this way:
it is as if he were saying, “In terms of the inner man, at one time
I was a child, but now I have grown old.”
Indeed, if he had not grown old, he would not be a prophet.
For it belongs to old men to prophesy. Even if you should some-
time see a young man prophesying, do not hesitate to say about
him that, in respect to the inner man, he has grown old, and for
that reason he is a prophet. In fact, when Jeremiah had heard,
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you
were born I sanctified you, and I made you a prophet among the
nations,”102 he answered, “I am a youth and do not know how to
speak.”103 But the one who granted him the grace of being not
a child but an elder in respect to the inner man, said to him,
“Do not say, ‘I am a youth.’”104 Otherwise, if these words are not
understood in this way, what reason would there be to tell a boy
who is young and tender of age, “Do not say, ‘I am a youth’”?
That is to say, you would not be speaking the truth.
Therefore, he was young according to bodily age. But since
the Lord had put his own words in his mouth, by which he
was to uproot and overturn and destroy and then in return to
build up and plant,105 this power of words, which enlightened
and sanctified his soul, did not permit his soul to remain child-
ish; thus it was rightly said to him, “Do not say, ‘I am a youth.’”
Therefore, what David says—I was young and have grown old,
and I have not seen the just man abandoned, nor his offspring seeking
bread 106 —is likewise to be understood in terms of what we have
99. Lk 2.52.
100. 1 Cor 13.11.
101. Ps 36.25.
102. Jer 1.5.
103. Jer 1.6.
104. Jer 1.7.
105. Cf. Jer 1.10.
106. Ps 36.25.
 HOMILY 4, PSALM 36 [37] 147

said before concerning the youth or old age of the inner man.
Otherwise, in respect to the outer man, when bodily sick-
ness comes or when trial or poverty or any of the troubles of
this life occur, one would thus have to consider the just man to
be abandoned by God. These things especially befall the just,
for whom to suffer persecution for the sake of God’s name is a
regular occurrence, yet they are not abandoned as they suffer;
and as they endure all these things, they say, “No one ‘will sep-
arate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus: neither
trial, nor hunger, nor anguish, nor nakedness, nor the sword,
nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature.’”107 Indeed, the
prophets, who wandered about the wilderness, through rocky
hollows and caves, were in need, endured trials, were afflict-
ed,108 and although they were wandering about in the wilder-
ness and were abandoned by men, nevertheless a multitude
of angels surrounded them. Thus Elisha, when he had been
abandoned by men, was surrounded by a heavenly army, as it
is written: “‘Open the eyes of this servant,109 so that he might
see that there are more on our side than on theirs.’ And he
saw the entire mountain filled with horsemen and chariots.”110
For the just man is never alone, but is bolstered by the support
not just of one or even two or three angels, but the army of the
heavenly host is present to him.
But if there is need for still more examples, take another.
As long as Jacob was still in his parents’ house with his broth-
er, Esau, he was not accompanied by an army of angels. But
when he had drawn apart to the solitude of the desert and was
traveling alone to Mesopotamia, he slept in a certain place,
and when he arose, he said that this place is called παρεμβολή,
that is, “encampments,” because he saw there not some single
camp, but many camps of God.111
We have said these things because, so long as his goods are
107. Rom 8.35–39.
108. Cf. Heb 11.36–38.
109. Pueri huius = τοῦ παιδαρίου [LXX], the diminutive of παῖς, which can
mean both “child” and “servant.”
110. Cf. 2 Kgs 6.16–17.
111. Cf. Gn 28.11 and Gn 32.2–3; on Origen’s confusion of the two epi-
sodes, cf. SC 411.208, n.1.
148 ORIGEN

spiritual, the just man is said never to be abandoned. Now

as to bodily goods, see what the just man says as he boasts of
these as well: “Up to this hour”—he says—“we have hungered
and thirsted, and we are naked, and we are struck with blows,
and we toil as we work with our hands.”112 And again, “We are
cursed and we give a blessing; we suffer persecution and we
endure it; when blasphemed, we entreat.”113 But because one
such as this was not abandoned by the Spirit, he said, “For this
reason I am pleased in my weaknesses, in injuries, in needs, in
persecutions, in distress for Christ.”114
The one who is abandoned, then, is abandoned in two sens-
es. He indeed is abandoned physically in the way we said ear-
lier, in which all the saints suffer and yet are not harmed. But
of those who are abandoned by the Spirit, it is said: “Since they
did not choose to have God in knowledge, God handed them
over to unsound judgment, so that they might do what is not
suitable, filled with all iniquity, wickedness, greed, full of envy,
murder, contention, sadness, deceit, grumblers, slanderers,
hateful to God, insulting, proud, haughty,”115 and other evils
like this, for which also they were deservedly abandoned. But
because such things are foreign to the just man, it says, I have
not seen the just man abandoned, nor his offspring seeking bread.116
Further, if you hear “his offspring,” are you to ascribe this
to bodily offspring? But how will you find this to be true (that
is, the offspring of the just not seeking for bread), when you
see Ishmael, the one born of Abraham’s seed, whom his moth-
er, fleeing from Sarah her mistress, was carrying in the des-
ert, and was surely seeking for both water and bread?117 But
Esau, also, when coming from the field, was starving and was
brought so low by the madness of hunger that he squandered
his birthright for a meal of lentils!118 Following what we have
said earlier, then, we must understand “offspring of the just”
112. 1 Cor 4.11–12.
113. 1 Cor 4.12–13.
114. 2 Cor 12.10.
115. Rom 1.28–30.
116. Ps 36.25.
117. Cf. Gn 21.17–19.
118. Cf. Gn 25.29–34.
 HOMILY 4, PSALM 36 [37] 149

also spiritually. And what else are we to consider “offspring

of the just” suitably to be, if not the disciple of the just, that
is, one who, having received from the just person the seed of
God’s Word, is born to eternal life?
For example, if, through your prayers, I am counted worthy
to be just, and to receive grace from the Lord in the word of
Wisdom and in the word of Knowledge,119 so that in accord
with the grace that I myself obtained from the Lord, I might
also minister the Word of God to you and plant it in your
souls,120 so that the Word of God, having entered your souls
and being fixed in your hearts, might form your minds accord-
ing to the image121 of the Word itself, that is, that you might
will and do that which the Word of God wills, and that, in this
way, Christ himself might be formed in you,122 then you will
truly become the offspring of the just, who do not seek for
bread, since you always have within yourselves the bread which
comes down from heaven.123
But if in response you say to me, “How many people heard
Peter and Paul, who were certainly the most just of teachers,
yet sinned nevertheless—how will these be called ‘the off-
spring of the just’?” But notice that, just as perhaps not all who
are from Abraham are also called “offspring of Abraham”—
those to whom it was said, “If you were sons of Abraham, you
would certainly do the works of Abraham”124 —so too those
who heard Peter or Paul but did not do what Peter or Paul
taught, were not their offspring, for they cast aside the Word
from their soul and squandered by a kind of abuse the seeds125
of the Word they received from them.

119. Cf. 1 Cor 12.8.

120. Cf. Mt 13.18.
121. Speciem, or alternately, “splendor.”
122. Cf. Gal 4.19.
123. Cf. Jn 6.41.
124. Cf. Jn 8.39.
125. Semen / semina in this passage being rendered both as “seed” and as “off-
spring”; further, the use of effuderunt may allude to Onan, who quite literally
prevented the seed from taking root: cf. Gn 38.9: ille sciens non sibi nasci filios
introiens ad uxorem fratris sui semen fundebat in terram ne liberi fratris nomine nascer-
entur.
150 ORIGEN

In fact, in this very Psalm in another place it also says, The

offspring of the impious will be wiped out.126 But it is certain that
the bodily offspring of the impious are not wiped out. Indeed,
Job was the offspring of the impious Esau, yet he was certainly
not wiped out, but was revealed by the Lord as just and as a
prophet and won praise from God above all the just.127 But
this is what we said before, that, just as the offspring of the just
are his word and his teaching—a word that so nourishes and
refreshes souls that they are said to have no need for bread,
since Christ is their bread128 —so, conversely, the teaching and
the word of the impious are their offspring, which, it is said,
are doomed to be wiped out,129 because they are composed of
falsehood; and when the light of truth comes, surely the dark-
ness of lies will be put to flight.130
4. All day long he shows mercy and lends.131 All day long the just
man shows mercy, and all day long he is said to lend. He has time
to do nothing else except lend from the money that he has
in abundance. Yet surely this will not be the interpretation132
proposed here also, that the just man sits all day long at a ta-
ble133 and has before him money to lend to those in need? Or
perhaps this will be interpreted as referring to what was said
through Moses: “And you will lend to many nations, but you
yourself will seek nothing in return.”134 But clearly this should
refer to the Master’s money that is ordered to be invested with
the m­ oney-lenders after it has been brought out of the trea-
suries of wisdom and of the knowledge of God,135 so that we
might make from five talents, ten, and from two, four.136 More-
126. Ps 36.28.
127. Cf. Jb 2.3.
128. Cf. Jn 6.35.
129. Cf. Ps 36.28.
130. Cf. below, Hom in Ps 36.4.8.
131. Ps 36.26.
132. Numquid et hic hoc putabitur, here again rejecting a literal interpretation;
an original meaning of putare is to “add up a balance, make up accounts” (quite
apposite, given what follows); cf. OLD s.v. § 2.
133. Ad mensam [= τράπεζα], a ­money-changer’s table.
134. Dt 15.6.
135. Cf. Col 2.3.
136. Cf. Mt 25.16–17; cf. Hom in Ps 36.3.11.
 HOMILY 4, PSALM 36 [37] 151

over, the more abundant the money we possess in our soul, the
more we will lend all day long.
But, even now, although I am not a just man, nevertheless
what I speak to you is the Lord’s money that I am lending to
you. But you are to pray that I may become a just man and
that I might be able to lend you the money of justice, so that I
might teach justice not by word only but also by being an ex-
ample of justice.
This is why, just as there are unjust monies that are gath-
ered wickedly and against the law through falsehood and lies
and various, evil acts of greed, and conversely there are mon-
ies which are collected justly and in accord with the law, that is,
from suitable and just labor, so also is it the case in word and
teaching. There are words that are collected not well, neither
justly nor lawfully, such as the words of the heretics and the
teaching amassed in opposition to the law of God, which we
should shun like wicked and pernicious funds derived from
the Evil One.137 Pray, then, that this money of ours that we are
lending to you might be found to be entirely the product of
just labor, wholly a product of the Lord’s mint,138 so that you
might guarantee that the interest is paid in full and so I might
not hear, “You should have given my money to the bankers.”139
5. So then, I was young and have grown old, and I have not
seen the just man abandoned, nor his offspring seeking bread. All day
long he shows mercy and lends.140 In an earlier place it is said that
the sinner borrows and does not pay back,141 and here that all day
long the just man shows mercy and lends.142 See how these are
balanced in opposition: the sinner not only borrows, but, in

137. De malo collectam; or more abstractly, “from evildoing.”

138. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.3.11 [SC 411.170], where the “money” produced out-
side the Church by heretics does not have the image of the Lord intact: Ego puto
Valentini sermo humana pecunia est et reproba et Marcionis et Basilidis pecunia humana
est et reproba et omnium haereticorum sermo non est probata pecunia, nec dominicam
integre in se habet figuram, sed adulteratam quae, ut ita dicam, extra monetam figurata
est, quia extra ecclesiam composita est.
139. Mt 25.27.
140. Ps 36.25–26.
141. Ps 36.21.
142. Ps 36.26.
152 ORIGEN

addition, when he has borrowed, he does not pay back. But the
just man not only does not borrow, but even lends, and lends
not only once or twice, but all day long; that is, he shows mercy
by lending his whole life long; and this is why his offspring will
be a blessing.143
6. Turn away from evil and do good, and dwell forever and ever.144
When you hear these things, it says, do what is good, and you
will dwell forever; that is, if you do as you have been taught,
your dwelling place will be eternal. For if you look “not to the
things that are seen, but to those that are unseen—for the
things that are seen are temporal, but those that are not seen
are eternal”145 —you will dwell forever.
7. For the Lord loves judgment and does not abandon his holy
ones.146 How is it that the Lord loves judgment? Since with him
nothing is done without judgment, nothing is done without
reason. And so, then, you, knowing that the Lord loves judg-
ment, do all things with just and true judgment, listening to
him who admonishes you when he says: Do all things with
sound judgment, with sound judgment drink wine.147
8. The Lord does not abandon his holy ones; they will be kept safe
forever.148 Just as it says that he will dwell forever, so also they
will be kept safe forever. Both certainly refer to the future time or
age for which the holy ones will be kept safe, so that thereafter
they live on in eternity.149
143. Ibid.
144. Ps 36.27.
145. 2 Cor 4.18.
146. Ps 36.28.
147. Cum consilio omnia fac, cum consilio vinum bibe; cf. Prv 31.4 (LXX): μετὰ
βουλῆς πάντα ποίει, μετὰ βουλῆς οἰνοπότει. Cf. also Sir 32.24a, 31.32b, and 1 Tm
5.23: vino modico utere. Prv 31.4b (LXX) is quoted by Jerome: Et in alio loco, Cum
consilio vinum bibe; Commentarium in Ecclesiasten 9.8 [CCL 72.326], where it is
used as a gloss on 1 Cor 10.31. The entire verse is quoted by Ambrose: Propheta
dicit: et tu cum consilio omnia fac, cum consilio de factis tuis iudica, cum consilio vinum
bibe, cum consilio loquere, ut effugias peccatum, ne incidas per multiloquium; Explanatio
Psalmi 36.66 [CSEL 64.124]. This use of Prv 31.4 is also found later in John Cas-
sian as illustrative of discretio (διάκρισις); Collatio 2.4 [SC 42.115]. On the basis
of an electronic database search, these are the only instances of this form of Prv
31.4 in Christian Latinity prior to Rupert of Deutz († c. 1130) [PL 168.1281].
148. Ps 36.28–29.
149. Ut deinceps in aeternitate perdurent.
 HOMILY 4, PSALM 36 [37] 153

The unjust will be punished, and the offspring of the impious will
perish; but the just will inherit the land.150 We have already spoken
earlier regarding the nature of the offspring of the impious,
when we related it to their word and their teaching, how they
will be wiped out, when every lie is put to flight like the dark-
ness from the light of truth.151
But the just will inherit the land. We have already spoken of
this, how the just or meek will obtain the inheritance of that
good and great land and how they will dwell in it forever and
ever;152 not only forever, but forever and ever. See how great the
Lord’s reward is. In return for the work of thirty or forty or as
much as fifty years, a man will receive not only the reward of
this age,153 but forever and ever. But if one abides in the Word
of God and cleaves to his Wisdom and is steadfast in the eter-
nal Light, he will also reach the point where he may give glory
to God forever and ever. Amen.
150. Ps 36.28–29.
151. Cf. above, Hom in Ps 36.2.4 [SC 411.106–108]; Hom in Ps 36.4.3 [SC
411.212].
152. Ps 36.29.
153. Non solum saeculi huius retributionem; saeculum is likely a rendering of
αἰών, which can imply both the material and the temporal dimensions of the
“age.”
HOMILY 5, PSALM 36 [37]

F I FT H HOM I LY ON P S A L M 3 6 [37 ]

HE L AW, indeed wanting us to open our mouth to

the Word of God, gave this command: “You will speak
these things,” it says, “while seated at home and while
you are on the way, when you are lying down and when you are
rising.”1 But Solomon also makes the same point with a brief
admonition in Proverbs, where he says, “Open your mouth to
the Word of God.”2 The prophet now also teaches us in a sim-
ilar manner when he says, The mouth of the just will meditate wis-
dom.3 For truly nothing other than wisdom should come forth
from the mouth of the just man. This is why, brothers, every
one of you who is less experienced, on hearing the word of the
prophet, should focus your efforts4 and practice, 5 along with
the works of justice, to bring forth from your mouths the word
of wisdom as well. In order, then, that this command not seem
difficult to you, I will offer to you a few words on wisdom.
The Apostle says that “Christ is the Power of God and the
Wisdom of God.”6 Therefore, if you are always speaking
Christ, if you are always meditating on his words, if you are
keeping his commands in your mouth, your mouth will wor-
thily meditate wisdom. For the meditation of wisdom does not

1. Dt 6.7; rendering pergens in via not merely as “on the road,” but as “on the
way,” thus captures the allusion to Christ as Way implicit in Origen’s preaching.
2. Prv 31.8.
3. Ps 36.30: στόμα δικαίου μελετήσει σοφίαν [LXX]; here taking “meditate”
(meditabitur / μελετήσει) in its original sense of “to focus upon” or “rehearse.”
4. Date studium, an explanatory gloss on the meaning of meditabitur; one can
then infer that it is to be understood in the sense of “devote oneself to.”
5. Meditamini; or alternately, “exercise yourselves”; so Crouzel [SC 411.225],
“­exercez-vous.”
6. 1 Cor 1.24.

154
 HOMILY 5, PSALM 36 [37] 155

consist solely in one’s capacity to teach or dispute, even exten-

sively, in the Church and defeat his opponents; this, of course,
is a work of wisdom, though for some more than others. In one
individual, the very act of faith in God’s wisdom is reckoned to
be wisdom, and in another person the delight he experiences
in the company of the wise and his love for their words is also
called wisdom; so also for some others simply to ask questions
about wisdom is reckoned to be wisdom.
But heed only this, brothers: let none of you be found not
speaking or meditating wisdom, or worse, hating and oppos-
ing those who devote themselves to wisdom. Those who are
ignorant7 share with the others this most terrible vice, name-
ly, that they think those who devote themselves to the word
and to doctrine are wasting their time unnecessarily, and they
embrace their own lack of learning rather than others’ efforts
and exertion. They alter the language, calling such exercises
“verbosity,” but their own ignorance or unwillingness to learn,
“simplicity.” Nevertheless, the most honorable is the one who
proves his wisdom by his actions and who is acknowledged as
wise because of the uprightness of his life. Blessed, then, is
the one who opens his mouth to the Word of God8 and who,
growing in age as Christ did,9 will grow also in wisdom. And
assuredly, if we are unable to make further progress in wis-
dom, it should not bother us at least to comply by opening our
mouth “in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs,”10 and more
frequently to God in prayer. For even this kind of meditation
of wisdom is no small thing, so that even in this way the mouth
of the just man might be found always to be meditating wis-
dom.
Nevertheless, it seems to me that it was not without reason
that it did not say, “The mouth of the just meditates wisdom,”
which could be seen as referring to the present, but said, will
meditate wisdom, for without a doubt it has in view the future;

7. Imperiti; the comparative form (imperitiores) rendered above in the first

paragraph more benignly as “less experienced.”
8. Cf. Ps 80.11.
9. Cf. Lk 2.52; Eph 4.13.
10. Col 3.16.
156 ORIGEN

on this point all other translators, except one, agree.11 Might

not, then, the use of this tense12 perhaps represent something
mystical, indicating a particular kind of hope, the promise
of a future grace and an inheritance, such that the mouth of
the just is to be filled, not with food or drink, not with deli-
cacies and delights, not by feasting on sumptuous meals, but
by meditating wisdom? No more will anyone be unpracticed13
in the Kingdom of God, nor remain untaught;14 no one will
be estranged15 from the knowledge of the way things are.16
All of us—if deserving—will become disciples of Wisdom. If,
here in this life,17 one is educated and instructed in attaining
the things possible to one still in the flesh, there he will then
be enlightened by a more perfect training, and there, those
things that are here pursued by effort and exertion will be
part of the abbreviated course of the education to come. But
the one who has not yet put aside the elementary subjects but
still speaks as a child and thinks as a child,18 there too he is
taught as a child so that at a certain point, having become a
grown man through progress in wisdom, he might put aside
those things proper to a child.19
But does not the Law (if understood in a spiritual way) also
indicate something like this, when it says, “You will speak re-

11. Crouzel, SC 411.228, n. 1, observes that it is not possible to determine

which translator among many (Aquila, Theodotion, et al.) this might be.
12. Hoc tempus; on the significance of shifting tenses, cf. Quintilian, Institutio
Oratoria 1.5.41, Loeb Classical Library 124, ed. and trans. Donald A. Russell
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), 144, and 9.3.11, Loeb Clas-
sical Library 127, ed. and trans. Donald A. Russell (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 2001), 102.
13. Imperitus; here in the sense of “untrained” or “unpracticed,” fitting given
the sense of meditare.
14. Cf. Mt 13.52.
15. Peregrinus; literally, of course, “as a wanderer” or “pilgrim.”
16. Rerum (possibly rendering τῶν πραγμάτων; alternately, “realities,” under-
stood as part of the schema: shadow–type/image–reality; cf. below in 2 and Hom
in Ps 38.2.1 [SC 411.370–372].
17. Hic positus.
18. Cf. 1 Cor 13.11.
19. Cf. De principiis 2.11.5–7.
 HOMILY 5, PSALM 36 [37] 157

garding these things20 while seated at home21 and while you

are on the way, when you are lying down and when you are
rising”?22 We can understand this in the following way: being
“seated at home” and “lying down,” means we speak the Word
of God while in the Church (which is the “home” of God), 23
that is, while we are in this body; “on the way” means we speak
the word of God while on that way who says, “I am the Way”;24
and “rising” means when we will have risen from the sleep of
death in the resurrection; then, as we are rising from the sleep
of death, we speak those things that are perfect, just as Solo-
mon also says about the one who has made Wisdom his friend
and intimate, “If you sit, you will be without fear, and if you
sleep, you will gladly take your rest and you will fear no terror
coming upon you nor the assaults of the wicked rushing upon
you.”25 This should be enough concerning what is written, The
mouth of the just will meditate wisdom, to which is added, and his
tongue will speak judgment.26
2. The tongue of the just is understood to “speak judgment”
in two ways: whether because everything he says is spoken with
right judgment, with deliberation, and with counsel, and noth-
ing is said out of wrath, nor in order to please men; nothing
spoken out of sadness, nothing from fear; for each of these
tends to perpetuate unsound judgment among men. Or be-
cause a just person surely speaks continually of the coming
judgment, ever reminding himself, as well as those who listen
to him, of fear of the judgment to come and the punishments
in store for sinners, 27 of the future scrutiny 28 as well as the
20. In eis; above (the first sentence of this homily) simply has haec.
21. In eis domi; here the locative is used; above (first sentence), in domo.
22. Dt 6.7.
23. 1 Tm 3.15: cum in ecclesia, quae est domus Dei; the customary rendering as
“house of God” does not capture the connection he intends to make here.
24. Jn 14.6; cf. Hom in Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.186–188]; one wonders whether
this is not to be understood sequentially: life in the Church—on “the way” [=
post mortem]—resurrection; in any case, it is clear from what follows that the “in-
struction,” begun in the Church in this life, is continued beyond death.
25. Prv 3.24–25.
26. Ps 36.30.
27. Cf. Mt 25.42.
28. Futura examinatione.
158 ORIGEN

things promised to the saints and prepared for them by God, 29

he might save himself and those who listen to him.30 This is
how the saying the tongue of the just will speak judgment 31 will be
fulfilled.
But further, if one must keep the future tense here also—
for it said “will speak” not “speaks”—we can also understand
it like this: however much we can in the present either speak
or discern that which concerns the judgment of God, it is
necessary for us to know what limits the Apostle is pointing
out when he says, “How inscrutable his judgments and how
unsearchable his ways!”32 But if we will be able to attain that
perfection of which he says, “But then face to face,”33 —that is,
when realities themselves34 will become clearer to us—when
we begin to recognize the meaning of every single thing in
this world, whether they have happened or are happening,
on the basis of what kind of judgment they have happened or
what judgment God employs in each and every dispensation
of his Providence; if one will be worthy to examine and see
clearly how “the judgments of God are a great abyss”35 —since
we will be able to receive more fully the grace of that Spirit
who “scrutinizes all things thoroughly, even the deep things of
God”36 —then truly and fully in accord with the difference in
tense of the verb used by the prophet will the tongue of the just
speak the judgments of God.37
3. The law of his God is in his heart.38 Not only will the just
meditate wisdom in his mouth and will his tongue speak judgment,
but he also carries the law of God in his heart. For the law, like
a kind of root planted deep in the heart, sprouts the words of

29. Cf. 1 Cor 2.9.

30. Cf. 1 Tm 4.16.
31. Ps 36.30.
32. Rom 11.33.
33. 1 Cor 13.12.
34. Res ipsae, likely rendering τὰ πράγματα αὐτά.
35. Ps 35.7.
36. 1 Cor 2.10.
37. Here taking distinctio and verbum as grammatical terms; cf. above regard-
ing Paul and Rom 11.33: necesse est nos illud scire quod definit apostolus.
38. Ps 36.31.
 HOMILY 5, PSALM 36 [37] 159

justice, the words of holiness that the just person brings forth
from his heart, and not only words, but also actions and deeds.
The Jews, almost without ceasing, 39 meditate the law of God
with their mouth and lips, but they do not have the words40
firmly fixed in the depths of the heart, which is why it is said to
them: “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart
is far from me.”41 If we then, in accord with what we have read,
meditate wisdom with our mouth, if our tongue speaks judg-
ment, and if the law of God is in our hearts, we will obtain
what comes next: And his steps will not be tripped up.42
I think you remember those things we discussed a short
while ago43 about steps, but we need to call to mind what was
said so that we might see how some individuals are tripped
up while walking and their steps wasted.44 So if you keep this
in mind and are diligent in remembering it, you should know
that, if you meditate wisdom in your mouth and if your tongue
speaks judgment and if the law of God is in your heart, your
steps will never be tripped up.
4. Following this it says, The sinner watches for the just.45 The
sinner watches for the just and looks at him, and even to see
him is, for the sinner, burdensome, and so he watches for an
opportunity to hand him over to death.46 Of course, this is what
was done against the Savior by those who slew the prophets47
and crucified God48 and have persecuted us even to this day:49
39. Cf. Ps 1.2.
40. Ea [= verba].
41. Is 29.13; Mt 15.8.
42. Ps 36.31.
43. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.4.1–2 [SC 411.180–196].
44. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.4.2 [SC 411.192]: istius ergo effusi sunt gressus.
45. Ps 36.32.
46. Ibid.
47. Cf. Mt 23.31.
48. Deum crucifixerunt: this is an unusually bold claim and unlike anything in
the extant works of Origen; there are no variants in the manuscript tradition,
and the Greek for this passage is lacking; cf., however, Ignatius of Antioch, Ro-
mans 6.3 [SC 10bis.134], who was similarly bold: ἐπιτρέψατέ μοι μιμητὴν εἶναι τοῦ
πάθους τοῦ θεοῦ μοῦ, “allow me to be an imitator of the suffering of my God”;
a few lines later, Romans 7.2 [SC 10bis.134], the more ambiguous, ὁ ἐμὸς ἔρως
ἐσταύρωται, “my love has been crucified.”
49. Etiam nunc; cf. 1 Thes 2.15.
160 ORIGEN

they watch for the people of God who belong to Christ, that is
the disciples of Justice, and desire to hand them over to death
and seek to kill them. But what does the just People of God
and the disciple of Justice say? They use the Teacher’s words
and say, “You would have no power over me were it not granted
you from above.”50 This can also apply to the time of perse-
cution of the holy martyrs and confessors by the pagans. For
impious persecutors watch for every just person and seek to
kill him.
But an interpretation such as this should not make one feel
safe in this time of peace. 51 Remember that every day the just
has the devil as a persecutor and that he is the one watching
for the just. For he is always lurking in ambush and “prowls
like a lion seeking someone to devour.”52 But if you are faith-
ful and rely upon the Lord, see what it promised you in return:
But the Lord will not abandon him into his (that is, the sinner’s)
hands nor condemn him when he will face judgment.53
That “he will face judgment” is understood in two ways: that
is, whether the just man is judged by God or whether God him-
self is judged along with the just man. For the divine Scrip-
ture often teaches that this happens when it says, “The Lord
himself will come to trial.”54 Therefore, when the just man is
judged with the Lord, he will not be condemned, and so it
says, Wait for the Lord,55 meaning that if you are troubled, if you
are facing difficulties, if you are experiencing persecutions, 56
wait for the Lord and keep to his way, swerving neither to the right

50. Jn 19.11.
51. While his father, Leonides, was a victim of persecution and Origen cer-
tainly experienced the pressures of persecution during his youth, persecution
was largely a localized and occasional phenomenon until the time of Decius
(249–251 AD); one can infer that Origen is preaching at a time without active
local persecution.
52. 1 Pt 5.8.
53. Ps 36.33.
54. Ipse Dominus in iudicium veniet: Is 3.14 (the ­Douay-Rheims translation of
the Vulgate renders this “The Lord will enter into judgment”); cf. Is 41.1; Jer
2.9; Hos 4.1; Mal 3.5; what these texts say, however, is not quite the same thing
as what Origen is saying (as Crouzel notes, cf. SC 411.236).
55. Ps 36.34.
56. Cf. Rom 8.35.
 HOMILY 5, PSALM 36 [37] 161

nor to the left.57 For if you wait for the Lord unswervingly, you
will obtain what follows: And he will exalt you, it says, so that you
will inherit the land.58
We have spoken often of the “holy” land and of the land
that is mentioned as the inheritance of the heavenly promises.
The nature of its location is also made a little clearer in this
verse. For this land in which we now live is said to be “below”
in accord with what is written: “For God is in heaven above,
but you on earth below.”59 But that land which is promised to
the just as an inheritance is spoken of as being not below but
above. This is why the promise made to the one who waits for
the Lord and keeps to his way says, he will exalt you so that you
will inherit the land.60 For unless one is exalted and ascends on
high and becomes heavenly, he cannot obtain the inheritance
of that land. I think it is for this reason that, as this dry place
on which we dwell, the lower support of this heaven (that is,
of the firmament), is called its “land,” so, too, of that higher
realm that is called “heaven” in the proper sense, the lower
support in which heavenly beings dwell and which is also, so
to speak, the crest of this firmament is, as I have said, rightly
called the “land” of that heaven,61 but also the “good land,”62
the “holy land,”63 the “abundant land,” the “land of the liv-
ing,”64 the “land flowing with milk and honey.”65 Therefore,
now the divine Word says: he will exalt you so that you will inherit
the land.66

57. Cf. Dt 5.32 and 17.11; cf. Hom in Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.188].
58. Ps 36.34.
59. Eccl 5.1; terra, of course, being rendered both “land” and “earth.”
60. Ps 36.34.
61. The challenge for the translator is that terra and caelum can be rendered
in various ways; terra can be “earth,” “land,” and “ground,” while caelum can
mean, of course, both “heaven” and “sky.” Here we see Origen’s teaching on the
“two heavens,” i.e., the firmament of Gn 1.6–7 and the “heavens” of Gn 1.1. Cf.
Hom in Gen 1.2 [SC 7bis.28] and De principiis 1.7.1 [GK 232–234].
62. Cf. Dt 1.25.
63. Cf. Ex 3.5.
64. Cf. Ps 26.13.
65. Cf. Ex 13.5.
66. Ps 36.34.
162 ORIGEN

5. You will see when the sinners perish.67 Perhaps this will hap-
pen first so that the just may see sinners and the wicked con-
demned. For the penalties and punishments for sinners are
determined first, when the just see them and recognize the
difference between a good life and a bad one, and when they
understand that by their good life they have avoided evils so
great that those who are being punished will, on seeing them
in glory, say, “We fools thought that theirs was the foolish
life.”68 Later, after they have seen how sinners perish, the just
will themselves be exalted and taken to heaven to inherit the
land.
Now, then, this prompts an explanation and offers consola-
tion in regard to a question that not infrequently strikes at the
heart of nearly every person. For very often those of us who are
weak, when we see those who are wicked and impious living
this life in complete happiness and flourishing with prosper-
ity and success,69 abounding in wealth and public honors,70
rejoicing in an abundance of children, and basking in a sea
of extravagance, we are scandalized, and in our hearts we say,
“Where is God’s justice? If things are governed by divine Prov-
idence, would God allow this wicked and impious individual to
rise to such a high degree of happiness?” This is why the divine
Word, when speaking in the person of the just man, says: I have
seen the impious not only exalted but exalted on high and lifted
up, above not just any trees, but above the cedars of Lebanon: 71
so that, even though the tree is quite high and the location of
the pinnacle loftier than all others, yet, seeing all these things,
I passed by, it says, and behold, he was no longer.72 Just what is it,
do you think, that the just one passes by so that this exaltation
ceases? If you recall earlier we were speaking of Moses having
passed by so that he might see a great sight; now you can real-
ize too what it is that the just is said to pass by.73
67. Ibid.
68. Wis 5.4.
69. Prosperis successibus.
70. Quite probably a reference to public office.
71. Ps 36.35.
72. Ps 36.36.
73. Cf. Ex 3.3. The just, as part of his progress, passes by wickedness and sin
 HOMILY 5, PSALM 36 [37] 163

So when we see the wicked exalted and swelling with great

pride, let us also, with both our mind and our understanding,
pass from those things that are seen and are subject to time,
and redirect our understanding to those things that are un-
seen and that are eternal.74 Let us consider that the things
that appear lofty are subject to time and last but a few days.
Let us look to the Day of Judgment and so come to understand
that the one who is exalted on high and is lifted high like the cedars
of Lebanon75 is nowhere to be found on the Day of Judgment.
For he who is not a sharer in the One who eternally exists—the
One who said, “I am who am” 76 —he is the one who is said
not even to exist. In short, sinners are accounted as having no
existence. This is why the Apostle said in relation to the call of
the gentiles, “God chose the things that are not to destroy the
things that are.”77 And in the book of Esther it is said, “Do not
hand over your scepter, Lord, to those who are not.”78
As long as someone marvels at the proud in their haughti-
ness, as long as he fawns over sinners and those who are proud,
it is certain that this individual has not passed by and has not
seen that these are as nothing, but is abiding in this present
state, and that is why he marvels at their present glory. If, how-
ever, he passes by in the way we described earlier—that is, if,
with his mind and understanding,79 he passes from things of

as he makes his way toward virtue; cf. Hom in Ps 36.4.1 [SC 411.181–182]: Igitur
de his quae in Exodo scripta memoravimus, id est, “digrediens videbo visionem istam
magnam”. . . . quia non est possibile prius videre visum magnum, id est intueri atque per-
spicere magna mysteria stanti in conversatione et actibus mundi huius: sed transire oportet
prius ab his et transcendere omnia saecularia et sensum nostrum ac mentem liberam fieri,
et tunc ad magnarum et spiritualium rerum intuitum pervenire.. . . Unusquisque qui iter
agit ad virtutem, proficit in ambulando, ut paulatim per multos profectus itineris perve-
niat ad eam. . . . Digrediens ergo transit primum locum malitiae et inde proficiens passibus
et ingressibus transit alias peccatorum sudes, tum deinde scrupeas nequitiae cautes, et
lubrica ac praerupta vitiorum.
74. Cf. 2 Cor 4.18.
75. Ps 36.35.
76. Ex 3.14.
77. 1 Cor 1.28.
78. Est 14.11 (Vlg).
79. Mente et sensu; earlier, mente et intellectu; below, in mente atque animo tuo and
sensu et mente.
164 ORIGEN

the present that are subject to time to those which are to come
and which abide forever—then he speaks the truth about the
one whom he has seen lifted up like the cedars of Lebanon, I
passed by and behold, he was no longer,80 for “both heaven itself
and earth will pass away.”81
With the Lord, all things that are yet to be are regarded
as already having taken place.82 So when he was saying, “For
food they gave me gall,”83 without a doubt this was something
yet to happen and yet it was spoken of as something already
done. He did not say, “In my thirst they will give me vinegar to
drink,” but rather, “they gave me vinegar to drink.”84 So, then,
with God, things that are yet to be are spoken of as already
done. If, then, you are an imitator of God and if you imitate
Christ, you do not wait for the sinner to pass away, you do not
wait for the one who is haughty to be humbled and crushed,
but you see for yourself with your mind and soul that these
things have already transpired,85 if you yourself pass, both in
your understanding and in your mind, from things of the pres-
ent to future realities.
Take this example in terms of what we are talking about. If
you have been on a ship during a voyage, you have seen lands
and promontories and mountains passing by—not because
they are constantly moving, but because you are moving under
the influence of a favorable wind—but they appear to with-
draw and to be carried away; so also then in this case if you,
by the prompting and inspiration of the Holy Spirit upon your
mind,86 set sail on a swift and favorable course, you will, with
your understanding, pass by everything that is seen (because
it is subject to time), and you will set your sight on those things
80. Ps 36.36.
81. Mt 24.35.
82. A direct assertion about divine knowledge as transcendent of the tem-
poral order.
83. Ps 68.22.
84. Ibid.
85. Transisse; a pun, of course; literally, “passed.”
86. Si sancto Spiritu mentem tuam perflante et spirante . . . above, vento prospero
flante: it is awkward in English to express the concept of “blowing,” so I have
settled on “under the influence of a favorable wind” and “by the prompting and
inspiration of the Holy Spirit upon your mind.”
 HOMILY 5, PSALM 36 [37] 165

that are eternal.87 So certainly you are saying that all these
things that are seen are as nothing now, for they will not exist
in the future. Thus, I saw the wicked exalted on high and lifted
above the cedars of Lebanon, and I passed by, and behold, he was no
longer.
Something else in this passage strikes me even more. I see
yet another impious one who is exalted and raised above the
cedars of Lebanon. For when heretics fashion for themselves an-
other kind of god above God the Creator, and they are exalt-
ed and raised by falsehood in their denial that God, the Cre-
ator of all, is a good God, by their impious assertions they are
raised above the cedars of Lebanon, supporting themselves no
doubt on opposing powers, by whose inspiration they fabricate
stories in opposition to God the Creator of all things. And be-
cause they understand the Law only in a literal way and are
unaware that it is spiritual,88 they are deceived in their own
thoughts.89 If I see them, then, and pass by, they will be no
longer. What should I “pass by”? If I pass by the literal level, if
I pass beyond the surface of the story and I reach the spiritual
meaning—for the Law is spiritual90 —if I explain in terms of
the spiritual meaning all those things in which they err and
deceive themselves,91 their impious and wicked dogmas will
no longer exist. And so it will be fulfilled that the impious who
is exalted and lifted up will no longer exist as I pass by.
But further, when his place is sought, it will not be found.92 The
“place” of impious teaching is the letter of the Law, and it is
the letter that kills. Therefore, when we pass from the letter,
which kills, to the Spirit, which gives life,93 once the letter
has been rejected, not even the “place” of the impious teach-
ing can be found. But how are we to look for it? While we are
disputing with our opponents and together investigating its
meaning, then we are seeking the “place” of that teaching in
87. Cf. 2 Cor 4.18.
88. Cf. Rom 7.14.
89. Cf. Col 2.8.
90. Cf. Rom 7.14.
91. Taking decipiuntur as a medial passive.
92. Ps 36.36.
93. Cf. 2 Cor 3.6.
166 ORIGEN

the letter of the Law. Yet when it is demonstrated that, insofar

as the history is concerned—once the letter is taken away and
rejected—it cannot stand; as we seek for it and argue about it,
the “place” of that impious teaching is nowhere to be found.94
6. Maintain innocence and see equity.95 The Word of God di-
rects us to preserve innocence. Moral decay has made such
inroads among humanity that in the minds of ever so many,
innocence is considered folly. But Scripture judges it to be the
work of highest virtue, for it considers innocence as that which
injures no one, harms no one. So when it says, Maintain inno-
cence, it has commanded that we keep ourselves from harming
anyone, injuring anyone.96 Moreover, we achieve this if we,
with a mind ever attentive and vigilant, see equity. Thus, I un-
derstand Equity 97 in this passage to be like Truth, Justice, Life;
that is, Christ.98 For by seeing these in conjunction with one
another,99 we will see God.
Therefore, maintain innocence and see equity, for there are re-
mains for the peaceful man.100 I wonder what these remains that
are kept for the peaceful man are? We usually speak of the “re-
mains” when the spirit is separated from the body; just as the
greater part of human nature is reckoned as spirit, so the part
of the body that is left is referred to as “remains.” If we there-
fore believe the words of the Apostle when he says that the
94. In this paragraph, Origen relates literal (secundum historiam) interpreta-
tion and spiritual interpretation, indicating that in engaging the heretics (haer-
etici, the antecedent of eos, translated here as “our opponents” in the previous
paragraph) and accepting their presuppositions, one ends up being trapped at
the level of the letter.
95. Ps 36.37; aequitas (in the LXX, εὐθύτης) serves here as one of the ἐπίνοιαι
of Christ.
96. Quae nemini noceat, neminem laedat . . . ut neminem laedamus, nemini nocea-
mus; both a chiasmus and an instance of asyndeton.
97. In the Comm in Cant 1.6.11 [SC 375.254–256], Origen teaches that aequi-
tas (playing on its opposite, iniquitas) should be (almost literally) the standard
or regula for the Christian life: Et ideo regulam quandam directam ponamus esse aeq-
uitatem, ut si quid in nobis iniquitatis est, hanc adhibentes et superducentes directoriam
mandatorum Dei, si quid in nobis curvum, si quid tortuosum est, ad huius regulae lin-
eam resecetur, ut possit et de nobis dici, “Aequitas dilexit te” (Song 1.4).
98. A brief catalogue of some of the ἐπίνοιαι of Christ.
99. Simul; or more literally, “all at once.”
100. Ps 36.37.
 HOMILY 5, PSALM 36 [37] 167

body “is sown in corruption” (meaning at the time of death)

and “rises in incorruption” (when the time for resurrection
comes), when even “this corruptible body will put on incor-
ruption and this mortal body will put on immortality,”101 then
there will be remains for the peaceful man. Moreover, the remains
of the peaceful man will be in peace and at rest there.102 For
the Lord further says, concerning those who are peaceful, that
“they will” also “be called children of God”;103 “Father, I desire
that where I am, these might be with me.”104 The remains for the
peaceful man, then, are with Christ.
7. But the wicked will be destroyed together;105 that is, all of them
will be destroyed in equal measure, for their shared end is Ge-
henna. The remains of the impious will perish106 then, when the
One who has the power will cast into Gehenna, body and soul,
the one who is lost.107
But the salvation of the just is from the Lord.108 But it is better
said in Greek: But the salvation of the just is with the Lord.109 It
did not say that the salvation of the just is in heaven, for this
will pass away,110 nor with any creature, for nothing [created]
is steadfast or unchanging, but that the salvation of the just is
with the Lord, who abides always, who is always the same, who
is always steadfast, nor can man’s salvation exist more securely
anywhere than with the Lord. May he be my abode, may he be
my house, may he be my mansion, may he be my rest, may he
be my d ­ welling-place. So not only is the Kingdom of Heaven111
proclaimed to us by holy Scripture, but also the Kingdom of

101. 1 Cor 15.42.

102. Cf. Wis 3.3.
103. Mt 5.9.
104. Jn 17.24.
105. Ps 36.38.
106. Ibid.
107. Cf. Lk 12.5.
108. Ps 36.39: Salus autem iustorum a Domino.
109. Salus autem iustorum apud Dominum; LXX = σωτηρία δὲ τῶν δικαίων παρὰ
κυρίου. Ironically, a Domino may be closer in meaning to παρὰ κυρίου than apud
Dominum.
110. Cf. Mt 24.35.
111. Cf. Mt 3.2; this, of course, is Matthew’s preferred expression, v­ is-à-vis
the other Gospels.
168 ORIGEN

God.112 As I recall, I have often said that the Kingdom of Heav-

en belongs to those who are still making progress, but the
Kingdom of God belongs to those who already have reached
the perfect end. This is why the salvation of the just is said to
be with God even now, since certainly they have been counted
worthy, by the perfection of their life, to reach all the way to
the Lord himself.
And he is their protector in time of trouble.113 What does this
“time of trouble” mean, except our current state, when we
journey through the tight and narrow way that leads to life?114
This assumes, however, that we are journeying through the
narrow way which leads to life and not through that spacious
and broad way115 that is widened by wealth and eased by luxu-
ry, that is smoothed by pleasures of the flesh, and that esteems
the glory of the moment. Their protector is not God, but Mam-
mon. The Protector, however, of those who are in trouble and
who find themselves in a tight spot is God—for “many are
the troubles of the just.”116 Indeed, they are troubled as they
consider the time of judgment and examine themselves lest
perhaps something be found in them that is a ground for ac-
cusation.117 Therefore, because of this they are troubled and
anxious, yet God will be their protector in time of trouble, at the
time of judgment, when the impious are handed over for pun-
ishment. Then the Lord will help them in the time of trouble and
he will rescue them and take them away from sinners;118 and not only
from sinful men, but also from opposing powers, certainly at
the time when the soul is separated from the body and when
sinful demons119 hasten to meet it, those opposing powers, the

112. Cf. Mt 12.28; on the distinction between Kingdom of Heaven and King-
dom of God, cf. De oratione 25.1 [GCS 3.357].
113. Ps 36.39.
114. Cf. Mt 7.14.
115. Cf. Mt 7.13.
116. Ps 33.20.
117. Ne forte aliquid inveniatur in eis quod vocetur ad culpam; cf. OLD s.v. culpa
§ 4.c–d.
118. Ps 36.40.
119. Peccatores daemones; cf. below, recurring elliptically as peccatores, “sinful
beings.”
 HOMILY 5, PSALM 36 [37] 169

spirits of this air120 who wish to detain the soul and call it back
to themselves if they recognize something in it proper to their
own works and activities.
For the prince of this world121 and the powers of the air
come to each individual soul as it leaves this world,122 and look
to see if they can find something of their own in it.123 If they
discover greed, it belongs to them; if they find wrath, or wan-
tonness, or envy, or anything of the like, it belongs to them,
they claim it for themselves, they draw it to themselves, and
turn it124 aside to the portion assigned to sinners. But if one
has followed the example of him who said, “Behold, the prince
of this world comes, and he does not find anything in me,”125
if one will keep careful watch over himself in this way, these
sinful beings indeed come, seeking what is their own in him,
and, finding nothing, they will nonetheless assail him in an
effort to divert him by force to their side.126 But the Lord will
rescue him from sinners. And perhaps this is why we are com-
manded—with a kind of mystery—also to pray for this, when
we say, “And deliver us from the Evil One.”127
120. Cf. Eph 2.2.
121. Cf. Jn 12.31.
122. Cf. Enrico Dal Covolo, “Note sulla dottrina origeniana della morte,” in
Origeniana Quinta, ed. Robert Daly (Leuven: Peeters, Leuven University Press,
1992), 430–37.
123. Cf. Comm in Cant 4.3.21 [SC 376.730]; Hom in Luc 23.5–7 [SC 87.316–
320]; Contra Celsum 7.5 [SC 150.22–24]. At the very beginning of the second
century, Ignatius of Antioch described the distinctive mark or “imprint” prop-
er to each believer (ἴδιος χαράκτηρ); cf. Magnesians 5.2 [SC 10bis.98]. By the
­mid-fourth century, Cyril of Jerusalem would preach to those preparing for
baptism that they were to be sealed or marked in a way that would make them
recognizable to the Lord: προσέλθετε εἰς τὴν μυστικὴν σφραγῖδα, ἵνα εὔγνωατοι ἦτε
τῷ Δεσπότῃ, Catechesis 1.2 [PG 33.372]. On the demonic efforts to impede the
souls of the dead, see Jean Daniélou, The Bible and the Liturgy (Notre Dame: Uni-
versity of Notre Dame Press, 1966), 24 and 57–58, with particular reference to
the baptismal σφραγίς.
124. Eam in each of these phrases refers to unaquaeque anima in the previous
sentence.
125. Jn 14.30.
126. Ad suam partem.
127. Et libera nos a malo; cf. Mt 6.13. Taking malus (πονηρός) here as a person-
alized substantive; this accords both with Origen’s argument above and with his
interpretation in De oratione 30.2 [GCS 3.393–394].
170 ORIGEN

It also adds the reason why the Lord rescues his just ones
from sinners, whether at the end of our life or at the time of
judgment, when that day, “the day,” according to the prophet,
of want and distress, the day of darkness and destruction, the
day of judgment, comes:128 the reason why they deserve to be
rescued then is because they hoped in him.129 Therefore, he will
rescue both from trouble and from want those who hope in
him.
But I want to show you, on the basis of the holy Scriptures,
how you should hope. Just as “no one is able to serve two mas-
ters,”130 so, too, no one is able to hope in two masters. No one
is able to hope “in the uncertainty of riches”131 and in the
Lord. No one is able “to place their hope in princes”132 and
in God. No one can hope “in the power of a horse”133 and in
God. No one can have hope in the world and in God. For un-
less you hope in God alone, and God sees that your hope has
been turned134 toward eternal life and that you entertain abso-
lutely no other hope except in him who gives life to the dead
and who summons into being those things that have no exis-
tence,135 you will not be able to be rescued from sinners. For
he alone is the one who saves those who hope in him, through
Christ our Lord, “to whom is glory and power forever and ever.
Amen.”136
128. Cf. Zep 1.15.
129. Ps 36.40.
130. Mt 6.24.
131. 1 Tm 6.17.
132. Ps 117.9.
133. Ps 146.10.
134. Esse conversam; literally, “has been converted.”
135. Cf. Rom 4.17; Hom in Ps 38.2.12 [SC 411.402].
136. Rv 5.13.
HOMILY 1, PSALM 37 [38]

F I R S T HOM I LY ON P S A L M 37 [3 8]

OD, THE Creator of human bodies, knew that the

weakness of the human body was such that it would
be susceptible to various illnesses and subject to inju-
ries and other debilities. For this reason, making provision for
the maladies to come, he produced remedies from the earth
and imparted the science of medicine so that, should sickness
afflict the body, there should be no want of a cure.1
Where are these introductory remarks taking us? No doubt
these are references to the soul.2 For when the Creator of
all had made the soul, he was aware that it would be suscep-
tible to vices and, for this reason, subject to and burdened
by sins. So just as he prepared remedies for the body from
plants combined by human craft and science, so too he pre-
pared remedies for the soul in the words he has sown and scat-
tered throughout the divine Scriptures, so that those who are
brought low by some illness, as soon as they sense the first in-
kling of sickness or perceive the prick and pain of a wound—
that is, when they see the soul doing something contrary to its
nature—they might seek out an appropriate and fitting spir-
itual discipline for themselves, drawn from God’s precepts,
which might bring them healing. For he has also imparted the
practice of a medicine whose chief Physician is the Savior, who
said concerning himself, “Those who are healthy do not need

1. Cf. De principiis 2.11.5 [GK 450], where Origen suggests that, in the end,
the characteristic potencies (virtutes) associated with various herbs and plants
will be made fully known.
2. On this significant theme in Origen, see David G. Bostock, “Medical Theo-
ry and Theology in Origen,” in Origeniana Tertia, ed. R. P. C. Hanson and Henri
Crouzel (Rome: Edizioni dell’Ateneo, 1985), 191–99.

171
172 ORIGEN

a doctor; but those who are sick do.”3 He indeed was the chief
Physician who is able to cure every illness and infirmity.4 But
his disciples Peter and Paul and the prophets too are doctors,
and so are all those who have taken the place of the apostles
in the Church and to whom has been entrusted the practice of
healing what is wounded. God has intended that these be the
doctors of souls in his Church, because our God does not will
the death of the sinner but awaits his repentance and prayer.5
And so this Psalm also, which has just now been read, shows
us—should we at some point be hindered by our sins—in what
way and with what feeling we ought to pray and beseech the
Physician on account of our pains and frailties. If ever, there-
fore, the Enemy has taken possession of us and wounded our
souls with his fiery darts,6 this Psalm teaches us first of all that
it is fitting, after sinning, to confess the sin and to keep the of-
fense in mind so that the heart, prompted by recollection of the
fault and pained because of its failure, will refrain and restrain
itself so that it may not do any such thing again. And I think
this is why the inscription of the Psalm is “A Psalm of David
for Recollection.”7 Moreover, it tells what this “for recollection”
means throughout the entire text of the Psalm itself.
Let us see what we, who are all sinners, are to say or do if
we find that we have failed,8 so that, when we have learned
these things in the sacred Scriptures, we might also be found
worthy to obtain a cure for our wound. For it was indeed good
that our soul’s “body,” so to speak, should always be endowed
with health9 and, fully surrounded by the armor of God,10

3. Mt 9.12. On Christ the Physician, cf. De principiis 2.10.6 [GK 432–434];

Hom in Sam 5.6 [SC 328.191]; Hom in Luc 13.2 [SC 87.208]. On further medici-
nal metaphors regarding the prophets, see Hom in Jer 12.5 [SC 238.26 and 350];
Hom in Lev 7.1–2 [SC 286.302 and 310]; 8.1 [SC 287.10].
4. Cf. Mt 9.35.
5. Cf. Ezek 18.23.
6. Cf. Eph 6.16; cf. Hom in Ps 36.3.3.
7. Ps 37.1. Cf. Ronald Heine, Gregory of Nyssa’s Treatise on the Inscriptions of the
Psalms (Oxford: Clarendon, 1995).
8. Si in aliquo delicto fuerimus inventi; taking the verb as a medial passive.
9. In sanitate donare. A curious idiom.
10. Cf. Eph 6.13; cf. Hom in Ps 36.1.4 [SC 411.76] and 36.2.8 [SC 411.118].
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 37 [38] 173

remain invulnerable to all the fiery darts of the wicked devil,11

experience no illness, no affliction, and that our inner man
take on no vice or sickness. If, then, through neglect of itself
or idleness of mind12 it falls into sin, it should recognize what
is coming upon it. It is a painful punishment to be rebuked
or reprimanded, and a torment so severe that even those who
appear faithful and devout, if by chance they slip into some
fault (as people sometimes do) and face accusation, react with
indignation and hate those who rebuke them. In fact, they are
reprimanding them to make them better.13
This evil was also the cause of the prophets being hated by
the people of old and assailed with persecutions. This caused
Isaiah to be cut in two,14 it forced Zechariah to be slain be-
tween the sanctuary and the altar,15 and Jeremiah to be sub-
merged in a muddy cistern.16 And, in the end, this was what
crucified our Lord Jesus Christ.17 For all these vicious deeds
and shameful acts that we mentioned above were committed
for no other reason than this: that while all are unwilling to
be punished18 by curative discipline through the correction of
those who are themselves delinquent, the people, unwilling to
endure the remedy and the cure, were burning for the demise
of the doctor!
They are therefore called “blessed” and “wise” by the sacred

11. Cf. Eph 6.16.

12. Animi, here probably equivalent to mens, maintaining a distinction in
some sense from anima; the later pronoun, eum, makes it clear that animus is its
antecedent.
13. Cf. Hom in Jer 14.1 [SC 238.66].
14. Secari; an apocryphal account of Isaiah’s demise, found in the Talmud,
Targum, and the Ascension of Isaiah 5.1–2;11.14. Justin, Dial 120 [Iustini Mar-
tyris Dialogus cum Tryphone, ed. Miroslav Marcovich (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1997),
276–78], had accused his Jewish opponents of having excised the account from
the canonical Isaiah.
15. Cf. 2 Chr 24.21; Mt 23.35.
16. Cf. Jer 38.6.
17. Et ad ultimum haec fuit causa quae Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum egit in
crucem; cf. Petronius, Satyricon 53.3, Loeb Classical Library 15, trans. W. H. D.
Rouse (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987), 108: Mithridates servus
in crucem actus est, quia Gaii nostri genio male dixerat.
18. Resecari; punning on the earlier use of secari in reference to Isaiah.
174 ORIGEN

Scriptures who, if rebuked when they do wrong, do not hate

those who rebuke them. For thus the Scripture says, “Do not
rebuke the evildoers lest they hate you; rebuke the wise man
and he will love you.”19 Do you see how the Scripture calls
“wise” the one who is liable to reprimand, and who does not
hate but instead loves the one who rebukes him? Such were
those who were reprimanded by the Apostle and, having been
reduced to silence, did not hate those who reprimanded them.
And this is why I think that the one who had sinned so grave-
ly in Corinth obtained mercy: namely, that having been crit-
icized by the Apostle—and criticized so severely that he was
cut off from the assembly of the Church—he did not harbor
hatred toward the one who rebuked him, but patiently accept-
ed the punishment and bore it valiantly. I even think that he
came to have a greater affection for Paul and for all those
who had obeyed the directives of Paul in regard to his pun-
ishment.20 It is for this reason that Paul changes his decision
and reunites to the Church the one who had been cast out
and says in addition, “Strengthen your charity toward him.”21
For he saw that he had preserved charity after being punished.
And therefore, in the wake of his sin, he did not so much
say that charity should be shown toward him—for it was al-
ready in him—but that the charity that was in him should be
confirmed by all.
It is therefore necessary that the one who sins be rebuked.
But because this reprimand, though of benefit, is a burden to
us who are weaker, we avoid enduring it in the presence of all.
And what do I mean by “presence of all”? Sometimes, when re-
buked, we do not tolerate the presence of even two witnesses,22
but we criticize the one who makes the accusation, and we say:
“You should have said what you wanted to me alone and not
embarrassed me in the presence of many.” We smart from the
19. Prv 9.8.
20. Here he connects 1 Cor 5.1–5 with what he understands as its resolution
in 2 Cor 2.5–11. Cf. Claude Jenkins, “Origen on I Corinthians,” in Journal of
Theological Studies 9 (1908): 353–72, esp. 363–65.
21. 2 Cor 2.8.
22. Following the scriptural principle that an accusation of a capital offense
be substantiated by the word of two or three witnesses; cf. Dt 17.6; Mt 18.16.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 37 [38] 175

pain, we are upset, we seethe, and we experience an inner tor-

ment of soul.
If this, then, is what a reprimand is like when we are re-
buked by others or in the presence of others, what do we do
when God rebukes us, if God himself confronts and rebukes
us in anger?23 We who cannot endure the wrath of a bishop
who speaks in rebuke but bristle as we receive it, how will we
tolerate that anger (which is said to belong to God) when it ac-
cuses us? Thus the prophet, aware of how many different kinds
of accusation there are, and—being human—though willing
to be rebuked for his faults, yet apprehensive that the burden
would be heavier (that is, that he be rebuked with the Lord’s
anger), also says here what he had already said in another, ear-
lier Psalm: “Lord, do not rebuke me in your anger.” 24 More-
over, he says what follows also in a similar way: Nor reprimand
me in your wrath.25
Therefore, we must say something about being reprimand-
ed, concerning which the Apostle teaches us in a more gen-
eral way when he says, “Indeed, at the present moment every
reprimand seems to be something not for joy but for sadness;
yet later it will produce the most tranquil fruit of justice for
those who have been exercised through it.” 26 This can also
be observed in children, how when they are reprimanded
with lashes by the pedagogues or they are jolted awake by
their teachers, they take it with great annoyance and reckon
the pain, which is inflicted on them for the sake of their in-
struction, to be the greatest evil. And although they are not
unaware that their progress depends on this kind of instruc-
tion and reprimand, nevertheless they bear it impatiently and
with annoyance. But if the instruction of the young is like this,
what should we think about ourselves who are old, what sort
of instruction or reprimand do we suppose faces us, which is
imposed neither by stewards nor by pedagogues?27 Scripture

23. Cf. Ps 37.2.

24. Ps 6.2.
25. Ps 6.2; Ps 37.2.
26. Heb 12.11.
27. Non a dispensatoribus neque a paedagogis; probably a reference to the fact
that household servants played a role in the education of the young in antiquity;
176 ORIGEN

certainly knows the pedagogue28 and the steward 29 and the

tutor30 of the child. What, I ask, should we think or feel, when
our instruction and reprimand are carried out by the Head of
the Household31 himself?
Let us return to the analogy of children. If a child is rep-
rimanded by a pedagogue, it will not be necessary for him to
experience the severity of his father’s punishment, which is
provoked by more serious and shameful offenses. If a child is
reprimanded by an instructor, his teacher will not be as harsh
as his father is capable of being should he note serious failings
in his son. For if the father reprimands for the greater and
more serious sins and if the son’s offense is so great as to incite
his father’s wrath, without a doubt after the torments, after
the punishments, he must also fear the possibility of being dis-
owned.32
If you have grasped this analogy, please pass from the ex-
ample to the reality, 33 and understand what is being said
about us humans. All bishops and all priests and even deacons
instruct us, and, as they instruct us, they make use of repri-
mands and speak pointedly with rather stern words. Moreover,
this is also the case when we are instructed by tutors and gov-
ernors,34 namely the angels to whom are entrusted the man-
agement and governance of our soul, 35 just as the Angel of
Repentance is described in a certain passage as the one who

cf. H. I. Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, trans. George Lamb (New

York: Sheed and Ward, 1956), and now Teresa Morgan, Literate Education in the
Hellenistic and Roman Worlds (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998),
esp. 17–19 on the various terms used for “teacher.”
28. Paedagogum; cf. Gal 3.24.
29. Dispensatorem [= οἰκόνομος]; cf. Gal 4.2.
30. Procuratorem [= ἐπίτροπος]; cf. Gal 4.2.
31. Paterfamilias [= οἰκοδεσπότης].
32. Abdicationis poena; literally, “being disowned”; perhaps “being disinher-
ited.”
33. Ab exemplo [τύπος] ad rem [πράγμα].
34. Procuratoribus et actoribus [= ἐπιτρόποις καὶ οἰκονόμοις]; throughout this pas-
sage, dispensator and actor appear to be synonyms; both render οἰκόνομος in the
Vulgate.
35. Cf. De principiis 2.11.6 [GK 450–454], where this angelic care is exercised
post mortem.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 37 [38] 177

receives us in order to chastise us, as the Shepherd teaches—

if, in fact, one considers that book worthy of acceptance. 36
Meanwhile, we who are human submit to various kinds of in-
struction, to those who chastise us and to those who punish
us. Nevertheless, we are not as yet chastised by the Head of the
Household, but by angels who are tutors, who divide the work
of chastising and reforming each one of us, and it is easier to
endure when we are reprimanded by one of these.
So too occasionally our correction has been entrusted also
to the pedagogue. For whoever was under the Law—since “the
Law was our pedagogue in Christ”37—was found wanting in
the Law, they were being reprimanded by the pedagogue when
they were punished on the basis of the Law. For they were pun-
ished either when they were stoned or when they endured one
of the types of punishments which Moses had laid down in
writing.38 None of these about whom we have been speaking
was punished by the Head of the Household himself. For nei-
ther the Law nor the Angel of Repentance was the Head of the
Household.
But there are other sins for which the Head of the House-
hold himself punishes the sinner, that is, one who, having
gone past the boundaries of villainy, has extended the impiety
of his evildoing beyond creaturely insolence. Nevertheless, no
one but God alone knows when someone should be handed
over to the tutors to be chastised; or when he should be turned
over to the stewards to be rebuked; or even when he should
be subjected to the pedagogue (in comparison to whom the
reprimands of all these would be far lighter). And God alone

36. That is, as canonical—an acceptance that, in the late second and early
third centuries, was often related to its use liturgically; cf. Shepherd of Hermas,
Vision 5 (25) [SC 53bis.140–144], where the Shepherd reveals himself to Her-
mas as ὁ ἄγγελος τῆς μετανοίας. See Bruce Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament:
Its Origin, Development, and Significance (Oxford: Clarendon, 1987), 140, where
he notes that by the time Origen was composing his Commentary on Romans, c.
244–246 AD, he held the Shepherd to have been an inspired work (Comm in Rom
10.31).
37. Gal 3.24; cf. also Origen’s comments on the Law as pedagogue in rela-
tion to the Gospel in his Comm in Jn 1.37–39 [SC 120bis.78].
38. Cf. Lv 20.1–21.
178 ORIGEN

surely knows if such a one provokes the divine hand itself, so to

speak, to punishment.
If you have understood what has been said, if you have fol-
lowed the higher meaning, 39 look now at how the prophet
follows this up when he says, “Although you reprimand me,
God, do not reprimand me in anger.”40 But we do not wish to
be reprimanded, nor do we tolerate the pedagogue bringing
things to our attention, and we do not willingly accept the rep-
rimands of tutors or stewards. And it is for this reason that it is
necessary that correction be imposed on us by the very wrath
of God. For the prophet says, Lord, do not rebuke me in your anger
nor reprimand me in your wrath.41
2. But the one who says this should offer a reason why he
does not wish to be rebuked in anger or reprimanded in
wrath. And let us see what this reason is so that, should we fail,
we too, by saying what this reason is and by doing what we are
instructed, not incur the vengeance of the Lord, who rebukes
with anger and who reprimands with wrath. For, it says, your
arrows have sunk into me, and you have strengthened your hand over
me.42 The word of the Lord is like an arrow. In fact, the Savior
spoke of it in this way: “he placed me like a chosen arrow and
has hidden me in his quiver.”43 Therefore, the one who speaks
the word of the Lord is shooting arrows. And when he speaks
in reprimand or in chastisement, he pierces the heart of the
hearer with a dart of reprimand.
In the case, then, of one who receives the words of the Lord
in such a way that his heart is pierced by the words he hears
and is goaded to repentance by them, it is certain that the dart
of God’s word has not glanced off him to no effect nor flown
past him, but that all the arrows of God’s words have been
firmly fixed in him. And so in a certain place it also says, “Have
you seen how Ahab has been struck through?”44 Rightly now
39. Altiorem . . . intellectum.
40. Jer 10.24.
41. Ps 37.2.
42. Ps 37.3.
43. Is 49.2; note here that it is Christ speaking through Isaiah; cf. Hom in Ps
36.2.8 [SC 411.120], p. 107 above.
44. 1 Kgs 21.29; see Marguerite Harl, “Les origines grecques du mot et de
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 37 [38] 179

the prophet also says, Lord, do not rebuke me in your anger nor
reprimand me in your wrath.45 The reason for this claim that fol-
lows is a sound one, and should serve to deflect from him the
reprimand which stems from the Lord’s anger: for your arrows
have sunk deep in me.46
For example even now, if out of this entire gathering of lis-
teners there are some who are aware that they are in some
kind of sin—indeed, would that there were none!—neverthe-
less, it must be that there are some who are aware of it and if,
upon hearing what we are saying, they listen in good faith,47
their heart will be struck through by the darts of our words,
and, pierced by such darts, they will be pained and turned to
repentance, and will say, Lord, do not rebuke me in your anger nor
reprimand me in your wrath, for your arrows have sunk deep in me.
But if, on hearing these things, he is not struck through, but
the arrow or dart finds in his soul, as in a body already dead,
no awareness of pain, and he experiences no recollection of
his sins, this man, indeed, is the kind who should be repri-
manded with goads of the Lord’s anger and rebuked by re-
proaches from his wrath.48 For this one is unable to say to the
Lord: For your arrows have sunk deep in me.
Would that all who hear me, struck through and so moved
by the things that are said, might experience conversion and
repentance and say to the Teacher, “For your arrows have sunk
deep in me, and while you chastise us with God’s word, while
you beat us, while you strike us in the innermost parts of our
conscience, you have strengthened your hand over me.”49 For truly
the pedagogue strengthens his hand over children while he
beats and corrects them, and he strengthens his hands when
stripes are inflicted not carelessly or lightly. And so one can say
to the Lord when he has shot his arrows (but speaking to the

la notion de componction dans le Septante et ses commentateurs,” in Revue des

études augustiniennes 31 (1986): 3–21.
45. Ps 37.2.
46. Ps 37.3.
47. recte et fideliter audiant.
48. Striving to reproduce the chiasmus in the Latin of Rufinus: arguas . . .
corripias [Psalm text]: corripiatur . . . arguatur.
49. Ps 37.3.
180 ORIGEN

Lord through whomever the Lord wishes to send the arrows of

his words) that you have strengthened your hand over me.50
For since the hand of the Lord is present to him who throws
the darts of words and who fixes arrows in the soul of the hear-
er, with good reason he also says to the Lord: “You have strength-
ened your hand over me, and there is no health in my flesh before the
face of your wrath. 51 For this reason I ask not to experience the
power of your wrath itself, for receiving only an indication of
it, and seeing somehow only its face as described through the
words alone of the divine Scriptures, my entire body is already
pained, and I am greatly troubled: there is not any health in my
flesh, nor is there peace in my bones,52 and that is so only because
I imagine I feel or see the face of your wrath in the holy Scrip-
tures, and not in fact your wrath itself. And if, because of this
alone, I suffer such things, for this reason I pray that I will not
suffer the wrath itself.”
See, then, if these things are not clearly stated in the pas-
sage which says, You have strengthened your hand over me, and
there is no health in my flesh before the face of your wrath. It could
have said, “at your wrath,” but now it says before the face of your
wrath. For if it had said “at your wrath,” what it said above—do
not reprimand me in your wrath 53 —would surely be pointless. But
now it says, there is no health in my flesh before the face of your wrath.
For indeed the appearance alone of your wrath (that is, the
very thought of your displeasure) has so thoroughly frightened
and changed54 me that there is no place for your wrath in me.
There is no health in my flesh. 55 The Apostle, in testimony
against the one who had sinned at Corinth, offers this: “Hand
over one such as this to Satan for the destruction of the
flesh.”56 Is one to think that he was wishing that something
evil would happen57 to the man who, he was saying, should be

50. Ibid.
51. Ps 37.3–4.
52. Ps 37.4.
53. Ps 37.2.
54. Convertit.
55. Ps 37.4.
56. 1 Cor 5.5.
57. Iniquum fieri. Cf. Crouzel, SC 411.278, n. 2.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 37 [38] 181

handed over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh? Rather,

it is clear that it was for his own ­well-being58 that he was hand-
ing over his flesh for destruction. For then he adds, “I have
handed over one of this sort to Satan for the destruction of his
flesh so that his spirit might be safe on the day of the Lord,”59
showing that it is impossible for the spirit to be saved if the
flesh is not handed over to destruction.
Listen to what this “destruction of the flesh” is. For that
which is destroyed60 is without doubt dead. The flesh is alive
in a sinner; but in a just person, the flesh is dead. On account
of this, the just person says, “We are always carrying about
in our body the death of Jesus Christ so that the life of Jesus
Christ might also be made manifest in our mortal flesh.”61
Likewise, we have received the command that says, “Put to
death your members that are upon the earth.”62 And blessed
is the one who is dead to sin, in accord with what is said: “The
body indeed is dead on account of sin, but the spirit is alive on
account of being made just.”63 So “to be handed over for the
destruction of the flesh” means that the fleshly understand-
ing64 within us is to die off and the desire of the flesh is not
to be alive in it.65 Because of the fact that the understand-
ing of the flesh is dead— that we might not think according
to the flesh66 —the spirit is made safe. Otherwise, as long as
the understanding of the flesh67 lives in us and the “flesh”
is alive, we are unable to think in terms of spiritual realities.
This, then, is how the Apostle handed over for the destruction
of the flesh the one who had lived according to the flesh, so
58. Pro salute eius; it is difficult to reproduce in English the double meaning
of salus in Christian Latin.
59. Spiritus salvus fiat in die Domini; 1 Cor 5.5.
60. Interierit; a cognate of interitus.
61. 2 Cor 4.10.
62. Col 3.5; here mortificate, cognate of mortificatio [νέκρωσις] of 2 Cor 4.10.
63. Rom 8.10; justificatio here rendering the Greek δικαιοσύνη.
64. Sensus carnalis [= τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκός], literally, “the understanding of
the flesh.”
65. In ea. The antecedent is more likely anima than caro.
66. Cf. Rom 8.5.
67. Sensus carnis . . . sensus [in nobis] carnis; in the preceding sentence, this is
expressed adjectivally as sensus carnalis.
182 ORIGEN

that, once the understanding of the flesh had died off, “the
spirit might be safe on the day of the Lord.”68 If you have un-
derstood the words of the Apostle, let us return to the matter
at hand.
Would that, when I sin in my body, the destruction of the
flesh might be brought upon me, that the spirit might be saved
(failure, moreover, always comes from the understanding of
the flesh). For if the flesh is weak, its progressive weakening
doubtless advances even to the death of the flesh, and at that
point it is rightly said, There is no health in my flesh.69 But if the
flesh, once weakened, recovers its health, that is, it savors the
things of the flesh and desires what is evil, then there is a
“health” in the flesh that is certainly not good for the spir-
it.70 The one, then, who is reluctant to be accused by God’s
wrath and to be rebuked by his anger offers the most legiti-
mate reasons for his acquittal when he declares that he has
been pierced through by the arrows of God’s words and so un-
nerved and so thoroughly frightened by the appearance alone
of the Lord’s wrath, that there is absolutely no health in his
flesh; that is, the desire for sin no longer remains in him.
I recall that once when I was speaking about that chapter
in the Gospel where it is written: “The spirit is indeed ready,
but the flesh is weak,”71 I had thought along these lines: that
before our Savior came to the cross and crucified the flesh
and made it die off, before it was fully put to death, he first
said that his flesh was weak. And, indeed, as long as the flesh
was weak, he said that the spirit was ready. But when he hands
the flesh over to the cross and finishes it off by means of a com-
plete dying, he then no longer asserts that the spirit is ready,

68. 1 Cor 5.5.

69. Ps 37.4.
70. Si vero [non] infirmatur quidem caro sed redit ad sanitatem suam, id est ut sapi-
at quae sunt carnis ac desideret malum, tunc sanitas est in carne, quod utique spiritui
non est bonum. Prinzivalli, Omelie sui Salmi (1991), 270, has seen fit to add the
emendation (non), which seems unnecessary in the Latin, on the basis of Greek
fragment 30 [SC 411.434]; the plain meaning, however, is clear enough.
71. Mt 26.41; here follows an idiosyncratic interpretation; cf. Comm in Cant,
pr. 2.4 [SC 375.92], where Origen relates the “weakening” to the “outer man”
of 2 Cor 4.6 viewed in light of Gn 2.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 37 [38] 183

but that it has been placed in the Father’s hands.72 In describ-

ing these things as he experienced them, he was providing an
example for our instruction. For it was for our sake that he was
weak.
Let us, then, look at ourselves, to see if our flesh is weak, if
it has not become lax from excess and pleasure, and whether
this corrupted “health” is present in it. See if through daily
­self-denial the flesh is made weak, if through ­self-restraint de-
sires are pruned away, lust is subdued, and vices cease. In that
case, even if it has not yet died off, there is nevertheless no health
in your flesh, so long as your earthly members are also being
put to death.73 But what causes the health in our flesh to
cease to exist? When we consider the face of God’s wrath. For
when we recall the wrath of God and put his countenance be-
fore our eyes (drawing upon his own ordinance, which is why
it is called the “face of wrath”),74 the flesh, deeply dismayed
and thoroughly frightened, becomes weak and languishes.
3. There is no peace for my bones when faced with my sins. One
who has sinned should also say these words and keep in mind
after he has sinned the fact that he has sinned, just as David
himself used to say in the fiftieth Psalm: “And my sin is always
before me.” 75 There are certain individuals who, when they
have sinned, are completely carefree: they neither think about
their sin nor does the evil they have done occur to them, but
they carry on with their lives as though they had done noth-
ing at all. These, then, are incapable of saying, “For my sin
is always before me.” But when, after a sin, one is consumed
with distress and afflicted on account of his sin and, prodded
by the goadings of his conscience, experiences an incessant

72. In his Dialogue with Heraclides 7.1–8.17 [SC 67.70–73], in an attempt to

undermine those who disparage the body, Origen discusses what occurred at the
death of Christ: his spirit went to the Father, his soul to Hades, and his body to
the tomb; the three were reunited at the Resurrection.
73. Cf. Col 3.5; membra tua super terram = τὰ μέλη τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, in the Greek of
Paul the prepositional phrase following the article serving adjectivally.
74. Cf. Ps 37.4.
75. Ps 50.5.
184 ORIGEN

gnawing,76 and is assailed by unseen accusations of guilt,77

with good reason he says, There is no peace for my bones when faced
with my sins.78
There is clearly a kind of “face” even of sins and, so to
speak, a certain complexion and appearance with which those
things done at one time are apt to be recalled and recognized.
When, therefore, we have placed our sins before the eyes of
our heart and, looking at each one of them, we blush in rec-
ognition of what we have done and repent of it, then, deeply
troubled and quite frightened, with good reason we say that we
have no peace in our bones when faced with our sins.
4. The one who repents of his sins should also add these
words and say, For my iniquities loom over my head; like a heavy
burden they weigh down upon me.79 For those who are neither
pained nor burdened on account of their sins but who are
carefree and awash in extravagance cannot speak these words,
nor do they sense that their iniquities are in fact rapidly grow-
ing higher and going up beyond their own head, while they
themselves are shrinking and being brought to nothing;80 for
this reason they are incapable of saying, For my iniquities loom
over my head; like a heavy burden they weigh down upon me. For how
can they speak these words, those who not only take delight
in their faults, but even, in their glee, prefer their own bad
deeds? For them, their sin becomes not a burden, but actually
a source of delight.
Therefore, to speak these words is not their part, but belongs
to those for whom lust has grown cheap, to whom the vices are
appalling, and those who have discovered that all delight in the
charms of the present is for naught, because hereafter it has no
future at all. These are the ones who can also say the words that
follow: Because my wounds have become foul and fetid.81

76. Mordetur sine intermissione.

77. Atque occultis confutationibus impugnatur.
78. Ps 37.4.
79. Ps 37.5.
80. Cf. 2 Mc 6.12–17, where God’s chastisement is viewed as a sign of his
love for Israel, whereas he allows the sins of the n
­ on-Jews to accumulate to their
destruction.
81. Ps 37.6.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 37 [38] 185

“Do not,” the Savior says, “cast your pearls before swine.”82
He calls “swine” those who take delight in the fetid stench of
sins and who, like swine, seek out every fetid stench as if it were
the sweetest smell. Consider the sinner as one who takes de-
light in his sins and who rejoices in his evil deeds: for he even
wallows in its stinking dung, and, having no perception of the
stench that is given off by the dung of sin, he finds delight in
it as though they were the greatest pleasures and the sweetest
delights. But if at some point it happens that he puts aside the
sensibility and the sense of smell proper to swine and grasps
the sensibility of the Word of God,83 so that he might be able to
smell the stench of his own sins, turned immediately to repen-
tance and seeking reform, he becomes unable to endure his
own stench, crying out for the Heavenly Physician84 and show-
ing him the sores from his fetid wounds, and says, My wounds
have become foul and fetid at the sight of my foolishness.85 Moreover,
here he has correctly called sin “foolishness,” for no one who is
wise ever commits sin.86
5. I was afflicted with miseries and bent low even to the end.87 If at
some point you should see one who has sinned mourning and
downcast by the sadness that is according to God—“for the
sadness that is according to God accomplishes a repentance
that is reliable for salvation”88 —he truly says, I was afflicted with
miseries and bent low even to the end. Perhaps this is why the holy
Apostle himself too, aware that he had at one time sinned,
says, “Miserable man that I am, who will liberate me from the
body of this death?”89 For he, too, had sinned when he perse-
cuted the Church of God, which is why he says, “I am not wor-
82. Mt 7.6. Cf. Hom in Gen 11.1 [SC 7bis.280].
83. Another possibility is to render sensus as “mind” or “understanding,” jux-
taposing the “mind” of swine (like the “understanding of the flesh,” τὸ φρόνημα
τῆς σαρκός; cf. Rom 8.6–7) to the “mind” of Scripture. “Sensibility” is used here
to capture the idea of sense perception, the metaphor being used by Origen.
84. Cf. Mt 9.12; cf. above at 1 [SC 411.258–260], on pp. 171–72.
85. Ps 37.6.
86. The contrast of insipientia and sapiens is lost in English.
87. Ps 37.7; cf. Ps 56.7 (iuxta LXX): laqueum paraverunt pedibus meis et incur-
vaverunt animam meam.
88. 2 Cor 7.10.
89. Rom 7.24.
186 ORIGEN

thy to be called an apostle.” 90 Therefore, he says, I was afflicted

with miseries. He does not say, “I am still being afflicted.” For if
my sins have already passed, I was afflicted with miseries; but if
they remain and I am engaged in them, I am still being afflict-
ed with miseries. It therefore says, I was afflicted with miseries
and bent low even to the end.
If you should see one who has sinned unable to look up
to the sky but, with his body bent and his face—not only of
his body but also of his soul—plunged downward toward the
ground, twisting his neck around like a circle,91 you under-
stand how one is bent low even to the end. But if you want
to understand by means of examples how each individual is
bent low by his own sins so that he is incapable of looking up
or raising his eyes to heaven, consider that tax collector who
in the Gospel entered the Temple and, standing far off and
not daring to raise his eyes to heaven, was striking his breast
and confessing his sins as he said, “God be merciful to me, a
sinner.” 92 To be sure, it is fitting for this man to say, I was bent
low even to the end, and all day long I went about downcast.93 When
it says this, it is as though it is expressing the heart and mind94
of the repentant sinner who says, “Ever since I sinned, I have
never laughed, I was never joyful, I never allowed myself any-
thing pleasant, but was always in mourning, always engaged in
penance, always in tears.”
Such is the teaching of the Gospel, where the Lord says,
“Blessed are those who mourn,” and, “Blessed are those who
weep.” 95 But conversely, if one is a sinner and guilty of many
evils and is struck with no sting from his shameful deeds, and
even more, laughs and is joyful and w ­ ell-pleased, and is in no
way disturbed by the goads of his conscience, see if it is not
fitting that what is written be said to him: “Woe to those who
laugh now, for you will weep and mourn.”96
90. 1 Cor 15.9.
91. Cf. Is 58.5.
92. Lk 18.13.
93. Ps 37.7.
94. Affectum et animum.
95. Cf. Mt 5.5 and Lk 6.21.
96. Lk 6.25.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 37 [38] 187

6. All day long I went about downcast, for my loins were filled
with illusions.97 The receptacle for the human seed is said to
be in the loins or genitals. It follows that the kind of sin being
indicated here is that which stems from lust. For indeed the
Apostle portrays lustful activity as among the worst violations
when he says, “Am I to take the members that belong to Christ
and make them members of a prostitute? Absolutely not!” 98
When, therefore, someone has sunk quite readily and without
­self-control into wanton behavior of this kind, then his loins
or genitals are said to have been filled with illusions. For illu-
sion belongs to the devil, who makes sport of the person99 and
prods him into the lack of s­elf-control characteristic of this
kind of sin.
It is no wonder, then, if the loins of sinful persons are filled
with illusions, since Job also speaks this way about the dragon
(who is understood to be the devil): “His whole power is in his
loins, and his strength in the navel of his belly.”100 The devil’s
power, then, is found chiefly in the loins of a human being,
from which fornication and adultery come forth, from which
is begotten the corruption of the young and every kind of filth.
So too is the sin of women clearly located in the navel of the
belly, something he wished to express with language more suit-
able, as the power and strength of the dragon (the devil) are
indeed found in both men and women.
And there is no health in my flesh.101 In this verse he shows his
progress and indicates that he is close to putting his flesh to
death and bringing it to destruction. He repeats this here a
second time102 so that he might make clear that the cure for
the annoying temptations has already been applied.
I have been afflicted and greatly humbled.103 We are bidden to
eat the bread of affliction on the feasts of the Lord,104 and it

97. Ps 37.7–8.
98. 1 Cor 6.15.
99. Illusio est enim diaboli illudentis hominem: a pun lost in English.
100. Jb 40.16.
101. Ps 37.8.
102. Cf. Ps 37.4.
103. Ps 37.9.
104. Cf. Dt 16.3.
188 ORIGEN

is said that during the same feasts a person should humble his
soul. And when the feast of atonement is proclaimed, “Humble
your souls” is said.105 Therefore, since the one who repents of
his sins afflicts himself and humbles himself like that tax col-
lector we spoke of earlier, for this reason he then says that he
acknowledges his heartfelt repentance, praying that he not be
accused by the Lord’s anger nor rebuked by his wrath.106 For
he says, I have been afflicted and greatly humbled.107 He is saying,
“Not only have I been afflicted and humbled, but I have been
gravely afflicted and humbled greatly.”
To give an example: say there is someone who is rich by
worldly standards and is living quite affluently. He experienc-
es a sudden collapse and is reduced to utter poverty; driven
from house and homeland, relegated to islands and crags, he
lives a meager and miserable life in solitude.108 Then, recall-
ing his homeland and his parents, remembering his noble sta-
tus, his family, his goods and his property, his abundant riches
and the entire life of luxury that he had enjoyed, with what
laments and groans he will call to mind his former happiness.
And so for this man, the recollection of what he lost is a great-
er punishment than the suffering he endures.109
In comparison with this example, consider for me also a
person who has lived his life temperately, chastely, and just-
ly, who is aware that he has acted uprightly. If this person ex-
periences a collapse (falling away from his homeland, that is,
from the Church), and is driven onto some island and its fear-
some crags (which is the abode of sin), tumbling away from
his resources and wealth (which for him were found in all his
good deeds), he finds himself living in deep poverty. All the
just deeds he performed will be forgotten on account of his
sin. If, then, he finds himself in such straits, with what groans

105. Cf. Lv 23.27.

106. Cf. Ps 37.2.
107. Ps 37.9.
108. There are interesting verbal similarities here to the account of the con-
ditions endured by the prophets found in Heb 11.36–38 and which recur more
explicitly in Hom in Ps 36.4.3 [SC 411.202–206]; see above, p. 144.
109. Taking this last line, unlike Crouzel [SC 411.294], as a statement, not
a question.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 37 [38] 189

and cries will he call out and say, “I cried out from the groaning of
my heart, ‘Lord, in your sight is all my desire and my groaning.’ 110 Ev-
erything I have done since I began to sin, whether the worldly
desires I have pursued or whatever else I have done, I bring all
this before you in my prayer and I place it in your sight. And my
groaning has not been hidden from you.111 For you know that I am
always groaning over this.”
My heart is deeply troubled, and my strength has abandoned me.112
See my heart, O Lord, that it is deeply troubled on account of
my sins. And so I pray that you do not accuse me in your anger
nor rebuke me in your wrath.113 But if my strength has aban-
doned me, doubtless I was at one time strong, and my manner of
life was good, but I later fell, because my strength has abandoned
me, and the light of my eyes is no longer with me.114 This seems to
be the voice of one who has fallen into darkness after being
enlightened,115 after the teaching has been handed on, and
after coming to the knowledge of the truth. Therefore, that
we will not also suffer the same fate, but rather that our light
might always be in us and, as we carry out the works of light,
we might, as sons of the light,116 have confidence in Christ Je-
sus, let us ever and unceasingly entreat God the Father, “to
whom are glory and power for ever and ever. Amen.”117

110. Ps 37.9–10.
111. Ps 37.10.
112. Ps 37.11.
113. Cf. Ps 37.2.
114. Ps 37.11.
115. A clear reference to baptism, followed pleonastically by references to
the accompanying catechesis, which enlightens.
116. Cf. Jn 12.36.
117. Rv 5.13.
HOMILY 2, PSALM 37 [38]

S EC ON D HOM I LY ON P S A L M 37 [3 8]

NE WHO confesses his sins to God and grieves in his

soul1 while he does penance—aware of the punish-
ment that awaits the sinner after leaving this life—
speaks these words, listing how many things he must endure
upon turning to repentance and reform, how his friends are
abandoning him and his neighbors also keep themselves at a
distance because he has turned to confession of his sin and to
sorrow for it. And so he says, My friends and my neighbors have
drawn near and stand opposed to me.2 Imagine for me a person
who is indeed a believer (yet a weak one) who has allowed him-
self to be overcome by some sin and for this reason laments
his failures and searches in every way for a remedy and for the
healing of his wound; although he has been overwhelmed and
has fallen, he nevertheless desires a cure to restore the health
of his soul.
If, then, a person like this, aware of his sin, confesses what
he has done and in the face of human shame gives little heed
to those who censure, stigmatize, or ridicule him as he confess-
es, he nonetheless understands that, by means of this process,
forgiveness will be granted to him and also that on the day
of resurrection he will escape embarrassment and reproach
before the angels of God3 for the things on account of which
he is now embarrassed before men. His understanding is such
that he does not want to cover up or hide his stain, but he
declares his failure, and does not want to be “a whitened sepul-

1. In animo (versus in anima); perhaps a reference to the higher activity of

the soul, ordinarily rendered by Rufinus as mens (or occasionally as principale
cordis / principalis intellectus).
2. Ps 37.12.
3. Cf. Lk 12.8.

190
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 37 [38] 191

cher, appearing beautiful to people on the outside, that is, to

appear just to those who see him, but on the inside being full
of every filth and the bones of the dead.”4 If, then, someone
is so faithful that, on becoming aware of something, he steps
forward and stands as his own accuser, upon hearing these
things those who do not fear God’s judgment to come would
certainly not remain weak when in the company of those who
are weak;5 would not burn when in the company of those who
cause scandal;6 would not lie prostrate with those who have
fallen, but would say, “Keep far away from me and do not come
near me, for I am clean,” and they would begin to despise him
whom they were admiring only shortly before, and would with-
draw their friendship from him who did not wish to conceal
his failure. It is of these, then, that the one who is making
confession says, My friends and my neighbors have drawn near and
stand opposed to me, and those close to me have stood far off.7
But it is not necessary for one who desires to be saved after
a failure to be afraid nor to be frightened at the criticism of
those who give no thought to their own sins and who fail to re-
member the saying of the divine Scripture: “Do not reproach
the one who turns himself from sin but remember that we are
all guilty.” 8 He should not spend time thinking about such
persons, but rather give thought to his own soul, praying to
God that he might be heard by him and lifted up after his
fall so that he might be able to say what follows: “For I will
declare my iniquity, and I will give thought to my own sin.” 9
Although my friends and my neighbors are opposed to me and
those close to me are drawing far away from me,10 as long as I
am my own accuser, as long as I confess my misdeeds without
anyone rebuking me, as long as I refuse to imitate those who,

4. Mt 23.27.
5. Cf. 1 Cor 9.22.
6. Cf. 2 Cor 11.29: Quis infirmatur et non infirmor, quis scandalizatur et ego non
uror? Note that in the scriptural text scandalizatur is passive; in Rufinus’s transla-
tion of Origen’s allusion it is an active participle (cum scandalizantibus).
7. Ps 37.12.
8. Sir 8.5.
9. Ibid.
10. Cf. Ps 37.12.
192 ORIGEN

even when charged in court and convicted by witnesses, and

even in the face of torturers’ punishments, still cover up their
evil deeds; for embarrassment at what they have done has a
greater hold upon them than the penalty exacted by the tor-
turer.11 For surely I know that nothing is hidden from God but
that everything is uncovered and manifest in his sight; so why
do I hide and cover up what he knows? Why do I not rather
accuse and convict myself? Why do I wait for an accuser, when
my conscience (who is my accuser) is with me? Perhaps for this
reason he too will spare me if I do not spare myself.
Therefore, those close to me have stood far off, and those who were
seeking my life used force. And those who were seeking evil for me spoke
vanity.12 Once again, it is speaking about others. For there are
certain persons who seek what is evil for the just and who do
not rejoice in the same way when they hear something good
about him as they delight when hearing bad things, and they
exult when they see the just person in evil circumstances. And
it is these who, when they see the just one confessing his sins,
spew forth, as it were, a kind of foul poison, and it is for this
reason that it says: Those who were seeking my life used force. And
those who were seeking evil for me spoke vanity.13
It is really quite clear that those who seek evil for the just
person are not the only ones who speak vanity, but so does ev-
eryone who strives to bring evil upon anyone else. For he who
seeks to do evil is not speaking the things that are according to
God. And this is why we ought rather to seek what is good. If
we could only return good for evil even toward those who hate
us, either persuading our enemies what the good is or work-
ing to call their defiant souls back to harmony and peace, we
might then become children of the “Father who is in heaven,
who commands his sun to rise upon the good and the bad and
who rains upon the just and the unjust.”14
2. Those, then, who were seeking evil for me spoke vanity and were

11. This actually appears to be a lengthy dependent clause without a genuine

apodosis, so I have been forced to manipulate it a bit.
12. Ps 37.12–13.
13. Ps 37.13.
14. Mt 5.45.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 37 [38] 193

plotting treachery all day long.15 See the one who is waiting in
ambush for the just.16 For I already call him “ just” who, first
of all, becomes his own accuser, as the word of Scripture at-
tests.17 For Scripture calls him “wise” who, when accused, does
not hate the one who brings the accusation but, even more,
loves him.18 So also he is called “ just” who after sinning does
not persist in his sins nor does he wait for the devil to become
his accuser19 —lest he bring his sins into full view—but accuses
himself and convicts himself and, through his confession, is
freed from death.
For those who were seeking evil for me spoke vanity and were plot-
ting treachery all day long. But I, like one who is deaf, did not listen
to them.20 What more outstanding or excellent virtue is there
than this: namely that an individual, upon hearing those who
curse and disparage him speaking maliciously in criticism, de-
traction, and accusation, turns his ear away as if not listening
and lowers his eye as if not looking so that he might not be
roused by anger and lash out in vengeance, not seeking an eye
for an eye21 nor a word for a word, nor a curse for a curse,
nor a lie for a lie, nor an accusation for an accusation.22 Such,
then, is the just one; as I have said already, I call that person
“ just” who, through his confession of his sins, will vomit out
his passions.
3. But I, like one who is deaf, did not listen to them, and like one
who is mute, I did not open my mouth. And I became like one who
does not hear.23 When I was being cursed, when I was being
impugned, when people were bringing forward all kinds of
charges against me,24 I was like one who is deaf and did not listen to

15. Ps 37.13.
16. Cf. Wis 2.12.
17. Cf. Prv 18.17 (LXX); cf. also Hom in Ps 37.1.1 [SC 411.264]; Hom in Ps
37.2.1 [SC 411.304].
18. Cf. Prv 9.8.
19. Cf. Hom in Ps 38.2.4 [SC 411.386], where this theme is developed.
20. Ps 37.13–14.
21. Cf. Ex 21.24; Lv 24.20.
22. Cf. 1 Pt 3.9.
23. Ps 37.14–15.
24. Cf. Mt 5.11.
194 ORIGEN

them, and like one who is mute, I did not open my mouth; in response
to their curses I returned no curses. But what good is it for us
to discuss these things? What good is it for us to explain these
passages from the holy Scriptures if we do not remember them
at the moment when the situation requires: when we are cursed
by our brothers, when they disparage us, when we are insulted
even to our face with charges and abuse, when everything that
is happening arouses our fury and moves our soul to anger? It
is then that we must remember these words; it is then that we
should call to mind that it is written: And I became like one who
does not hear and who does not have a harsh word in his mouth.25
There will be times when someone speaks against me and
perhaps lies; and other times when what he says is even true.
Nevertheless, I can say—and do so truthfully—much worse
things about him. If indeed I am a sinner and recall none of
these things of which we have now spoken, I will imitate the
malice of that person, and I will become, not like God, but
like him, returning curses for curses. But if I am a just person,
like one who is deaf, I do not listen, and like one who is mute, who
does not have a harsh word in his mouth,26 I say nothing in reply,
and though I have grounds to make an accusation, I do not ac-
cuse. For I understand that the correct way for one to make an
accusation is to do so dispassionately, with a view toward the
­well-being27 of the one being rebuked, not vengeance.
Therefore, if I rebuke someone when he speaks disparag-
ingly about me or speaks ill of me, I am not acting properly.
For I am rebuking him out of anger and indignation, desiring
to inflict sadness upon him, not that sadness that is “accord-
ing to God, the sadness that accomplishes a repentance that is
reliable for salvation,” 28 but a sadness that harms rather than
reforms the soul. If, then, we remember these things, we will
not act this way; but when something like this happens to us,
we say, I became like one who does not hear and who does not have a
harsh word in his mouth.29
25. Ps 37.15.
26. Ibid.
27. Salutem; of course, “salvation,” too.
28. 2 Cor 7.10.
29. Ps 37.15.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 37 [38] 195

But why have I become like this? For, it says, I have placed my
hope in you.30 For if I had not placed my hope in you and had
no faith in you who said, “‘Vengeance is mine; I will give what
is due,’ says the Lord,”31 I would indeed have avenged myself;
but now I remember that precept whereby we are command-
ed not to avenge ourselves, but to leave that [to God].32 And
you will find these things in the divine Scriptures. You read:
I became like one who does not hear and who does not have a harsh
word in his mouth. For I have placed my hope in you, Lord, and you
will hear me, Lord, my God.33 I, like a deaf man, did not listen to
those who were slandering me; but you [God], listen34 to what
they are saying.
If we were such as the divine Word desires us to be—like
Elijah—we would indeed tell God to grant rain, and it would
rain;35 like Samuel at the time of harvest, we would ask that
he grant from heaven an abundance of rain, and we would be
heard. But how will God hear us now, when we do not listen
to him? How will he do what we want, when we do not do what
he wants? God wants us to be such that we speak to God like
gods.36 He wishes us to be children of God, so that we might
become partakers37 and, as God’s children, ­co-heirs,38 so that
we might say (just as he did), “Father, I know that you always
hear me.”39 We know that God has said to us, “I have said, you
are all gods and children of the Most High.”40 But in return
for our merits41 we await rather that which follows (which we

30. Ps 37.16.
31. Dt 32.35.
32. Cf. Rom 12.19, itself a quotation of Dt 32.35.
33. Ps 37.15–16.
34. Tu, audi; an imperative.
35. 1 Kgs 18.45.
36. Cf. Ps 81.6.
37. Consortes; cf. 2 Pt 1.4. See Norman Russell, The Doctrine of Divinization
in Greek Patristic Thought (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 151, on the
importance of this text for Origen.
38. Cf. Rom 8.17.
39. Jn 11.42.
40. Ps 81.6.
41. Pro meritis nostris; here taken negatively (“on account of what we de-
serve”).
196 ORIGEN

deserve): “But you will die like mortals, and like one of the
princes you will fall”;42 but you will hear me, Lord my God.43
4. For I said: Do not let my enemies triumph over me.44 When I was
slandered and did not respond in kind to those who were slan-
dering me, I was saying these words: “‘If,’ in fact, ‘I responded
in kind to those who were repaying evils to me,’45 I too would
certainly be abandoned by God, and, once abandoned, I would
necessarily fall. Moreover, when I fall, my enemies will triumph
over me.” But if I do not return evil for evil,46 but leave47 the
judgment to God, with his help I will not fall down but will
stand firm, and my enemies will not triumph over me. For I also
said this: While my feet were being moved, they were speaking great
things against me.48 As long as I remain unafraid and steadfast,
my enemies will not speak great things against me, for they
have nothing to say. But as soon as I waver (not to say fall), they
will at once begin to reproach me and say, “Do you see him?
Look what he did. Though he teaches one thing, he does an-
other, the opposite of what he teaches.” Persons like this nec-
essarily say, While my feet were being moved, they were speaking great
things against me.49
But another voice, comparatively better than this last one,
insofar as it relates to the speakers50 introduced by the proph-
ets, says this: “Yet my feet were not moved much,”51 meaning,
“The feet of that individual were certainly moved, but my feet
were moved a little less.” Perhaps there might be someone else

42. Ps 81.7.
43. Ps 37.16.
44. Ps 37.17.
45. Ps 7.5.
46. Cf. 1 Pt 3.9.
47. Dereliquero; a nice use of the verb from the line before (derelinquar . . .
derelictus).
48. Ps 37.17.
49. Ibid.
50. Personas [= πρόσωπα]; taken here in the technical sense of “role,” “char-
acter,” or “voice”; elsewhere in the homilies, Origen will refer to the “speaker”
or “voice” (vox).
51. Ps 72.2. The text here substitutes the paulominus of 72.2b for the paene
of 72.2a; therefore, this translation differs from what is found in Hom 36.4.1
(above, pp. 133 and 139 n. 53).
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 37 [38] 197

whose feet were moved either not a little or less to not a little
extent; I think of the one who says: “He has set my feet upon
rock.”52 This person attests absolutely no movement of his feet,
but stability. Blessed are we, then, if absolutely no charge that
we have moved our feet is raised against us, but we are found
standing on rock, that is, upon the Lord Jesus Christ himself. 53
But if we are unable to remain so stable, at least this second-
ary and lesser position becomes ours, so that our steps are not
moved much. But the third and last position is nearest to a fall,
when our feet have been moved.
5. For I am prepared for scourging.54 This, too, is the voice of
the sinner—a good one, the best kind, so to speak—one who
has indeed sinned, but who awaits scourging for his failures,
by which he wishes to be reformed here and now, so that he
might not be punished and perish in the future. Imagine a
sinner who says to the Lord, “Since I have sinned, I am already
right now prepared for scourging; do not keep me for the eternal
fire, 55 do not keep me for the outer darkness.56 While I am in
this life, give me what is due for my sins, for you scourge every
child you receive.57 I beg you, scourge me too and do not keep
me with those who are not scourged, ‘who do not experience
the labors of men and who will not be scourged like men,’58
that is, who are completely abandoned by you, whose reform
and correction you do not seek.”
Therefore, he who knows the difference between the sin-
ner who is scourged by him who “scourges every child he re-
ceives”59 and the one who is not considered worthy of scourg-
ing, says to the Lord, “I am prepared for scourging; 60 that is, if you
want to bring illness upon me, if you want to send sickness,
I will endure them patiently. For I know that not only do I de-

52. Ps 39.3.
53. Cf. 1 Cor 10.4.
54. Ps 37.18.
55. Noli me reservare igni aeterno; cf. Mt 25.41.
56. Cf. Mt 8.12.
57. Cf. Heb 12.6.
58. Ps 72.5.
59. Heb 12.6.
60. Ps 37.18.
198 ORIGEN

serve sicknesses for the forgiveness of my sins, but I desire all

afflictions to be purgative, only so that I might not be kept for
eternal punishments and tortures. If it pleases you to inflict
penalties upon me, I endure them; if it pleases you that all my
resources be destroyed, let them perish completely, only let my
soul not perish before you. If you want me to be purified by the
death of loved ones and those close to me, even let them die
so that they too might be freed from the bonds of this kind;
let children be taken away while they are yet children and who
at their naïve age have not yet been tainted by the more seri-
ous stains of sins. I am prepared, therefore, to be reformed by
scourging and to be flogged—I refuse none of these—only so
that I might escape the punishments of eternal fire.61 I am pre-
pared, then, for scourging, and my pain is before me always.62 I have
pain before my eyes so that, by means of pain here and now, I
can counterbalance the pain of punishments to come.”
6. For I declare my wickedness.63 We have spoken quite often
of the declaration of wickedness, that is, the confession of
sin.64 See, then, what the divine Scripture teaches us, namely,
that we should not conceal sin within. For perhaps like those
who have undigested food stuffed within themselves (or heavy
and annoying pressure of fluid or humor on the stomach),
and once they vomit, they are relieved, so too those who have
sinned, if indeed they hide or hold back their sin within them-
selves, are internally pressured and nearly suffocated by the
humor and fluid of the sin. But if one becomes his own accus-
er, so long as he accuses himself and confesses, he vomits forth
his fault and relieves every reason for sickness.
Only consider very carefully the one to whom you should
confess your sin. First test the doctor to whom you are to ex-
pose the source of your sickness, one who knows how to be
weak with those who are weak,65 to weep with those who

61. Supplicia aeterni ignis; cf. Mt 25.41.

62. Ps 37.18.
63. Ps 37.19.
64. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.1.5 [SC 411.84]; Hom in Ps 36.2.1 [SC 411.98–100];
Hom in Ps 36.4.2 [SC 411.190]; Hom in Ps 37.2.1 [SC 411.300–302].
65. Cf. 1 Cor 9.22.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 37 [38] 199

weep,66 one who is versed in the practices of mercy and com-

passion. And so only when he has first demonstrated that he is
a learned and merciful doctor, should you carry it out and fol-
low his advice when he speaks or offers it. If he identifies your
illness and anticipates that it is such that it should be exposed
and cured in the assembly of the Church as a whole, after care-
ful consultation and on the expert advice of that doctor, then
this is the course of action to be taken; perhaps in this way oth-
ers will be able to be edified and you yourself readily healed.
For I will declare my wickedness, and I will give thought to my own
sin.67 Whoever among you is aware that he is in some kind
of sin and yet is as carefree as if he had done nothing wrong,
such a one should be moved by this passage which says, I will
give thought to my own sin. Is it in fact good for one who has
sinned to remain tranquil68 and, like one who has not sinned
at all, to have no anxiety nor give thought to how he may wipe
out his sin? If any blemish or sore appears on your body or if
it is swollen from some injury, you are careful to seek out what
type of cure should be applied and how the body’s former
health is to be restored. If some harsh liquid has been poured
around your eyes, you are careful to seek out how you might
heal it and prevent blindness.
When your soul is sick and burdened by weariness from its
sins, are you free of anxiety? Do you have such little regard
for Gehenna69 that you scorn and mock the punishments70 of
eternal fire? Do you think so little of the judgment of God that
you despise the Church when it cautions you? Do you not fear
to share in the Body of Christ when you approach for the Eu-
charist, as if you were clean and pure, as if there were nothing
unworthy in you? Do you think, in the midst of all this, you can
escape God’s judgment? Do you not remember that it is writ-
ten: “Therefore, there are many among you who are sick and

66. Cf. Rom 12.15.

67. Ps 37.19; note the shift in tense (pronuntio above; pronuntiabo here).
68. Prinzivalli, Origene, Omelie sui Salmi (1991) has (unnecessarily) emended
the text by adding [non].
69. Cf. Mt 10.28.
70. Cf. Mt 25.41.
200 ORIGEN

weak and who sleep”?71 Why are many weak? Because they nei-
ther exercise discernment regarding themselves nor examine
themselves, nor do they understand the significance of what
it means to share communion with the Church72 nor what it
means to approach these mysteries, so great and so sublime.
They experience what those who are sick with fever usually ex-
perience: when they take the food of the healthy, they bring
ruin upon themselves. These are the things about which it was
said: I will give thought to my own sin.73
7. It follows: But my enemies live and have been strengthened
more than I.74 To all this, one should respond quietly 75 with:
I, however, will give thought to my own sin. For often, if we who
are sinners see our enemies living more prosperously, we are
downcast and pour out complaints against divine Providence.
But the one who wishes to be saved, when faced with all these
things, should always answer himself with this: “Even though
my enemies live and have been strengthened more than I, neverthe-
less I will give thought to my own sin. And although I see myself
as a sinner, nevertheless when I also consider the fact that the
sins of others are perhaps more serious, and seeing, too, that
they show no concern for their sins, when I compare myself to
those who give no thought whatsoever to their most serious
offenses and I give thought to my own sin, I have hope in you.”
8. And those who hate me unjustly have multiplied.76 It is not pos-
sible in this life not to be hated.77 Christ Jesus was hated.78 And
why do I say that it is not possible in this life not to be hated?

71. 1 Cor 11.30.

72. Communicare ecclesiae = communicatio in sacris.
73. Ps 37.19.
74. Ps 37.20.
75. Ad quae omnia subsonare illud debet. Souter, s.v. subsonare, offers this passage
from Rufinus’s translation as witnessing the meaning “explain secretly,” which is
clearly out of place here; Crouzel [SC 411.323] offers “doit faire écho,” which
perhaps does more for the term than is required; “respond quietly,” in fact, is
closer to the root meaning than Crouzel and more sensible than Souter.
76. Ps 37.20.
77. Cf. Hom in Ps 38.1.5 [SC 411.344] and the similar comments in the Ex ad
Mart 41–42 [GCS 2.38–39].
78. Cf. Jn 15.18.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 37 [38] 201

God himself,79 who did not come into this life, was hated by
some. For if he were not hated, the prophet would never have
said, “Will I not hate those who hate you, Lord, and pine away
over your enemies? I hated them with a perfect hatred.”80 Those
who are followers of Marcion, Basilides, and Valentinus hate
God and hate his words. Since, then, God is hated and Christ is
considered anathema by the Jews even to the present day, since
the Holy Spirit, who has spoken through the prophets, is hated
by the heretics, do you want not to be hated but to be loved
and spoken well of by all? Beware lest that judgment apply to
you that says, “Woe to you when all people speak well of you”!81
Should we not rather take care that this alone should be what
we say: Those who hate me unjustly have multiplied? 82
I want to be hated, so that my conscience might know that
I am enduring hatred unjustly. For the prophets were also hat-
ed, but unjustly. Christ was hated, but for no reason.83 But if
I am hated on account of my sin, I cannot say, Those who hate me
unjustly have multiplied, for I am hated justly if I am hated be-
cause of my dishonorable and shameful actions. I cannot say,
“For they hate me for no reason.”84 Would that we too could
say with such great confidence, Those who hate me unjustly have
multiplied.
9. Those who repay me evil for good—I was certainly doing
good to them, but they, forgetting my good deeds, were repay-
ing evil for good—they were slandering me, for I was pursuing jus-
tice.85 My enemies slander and reproach me for sins that I may
have done at one time, and they show no respect for86 the fact
that I am pursuing justice, nor do they grant forgiveness for
my past misdeeds in light of my good deeds here and now.

79. Deus ipse [= ὁ θεός] here serving as the proper name of the Father.
80. Ps 138.21–22.
81. Lk 6.26.
82. Ps 37.20.
83. Cf. Jn 15.25.
84. Jn 15.25, itself alluding to Ps 24.19.
85. Ps 37.21.
86. Erubescunt, literally, “blush” (so Crouzel, SC 411.325, “ils n’en rougissent
pas”), though taken here in a secondary, transferred sense, which makes more
sense.
202 ORIGEN

But you, Lord, because I was pursuing justice, do not abandon

me, O Lord my God. Now this is the voice of one who is making
confession and asking for mercy: Do not abandon me, O Lord my
God, and do not depart from me.87 In fact, in another Psalm it
says, “Take not your Holy Spirit from me.”88 In this way it is
saying to God himself, do not depart from me. This shows that
God departs from some because of their merits and that he re-
mains with others on account of their merits. Unhappy, then,
is the person from whom God has departed, but blessed is the
person with whom God remains.
Come to my help, Lord God of my salvation. 89 Let us therefore
pray and say, Come to my help, for the battle is great and our
enemies are strong. The enemy is treacherous; he is an unseen
enemy who attacks through those who are seen. Come to our
help, Lord our God, and assist us through your holy Son, our
Lord Jesus Christ, through whom you have redeemed us all,90
and through whom to you be “glory and power forever and
ever. Amen.”91

87. Ps 37.22.
88. Ps 50.13.
89. Ps 37.23.
90. Cf. Rv 5.9.
91. Rv 5.13.
HOMILY 1, PSALM 38 [39]

F I R S T HOM I LY ON P S A L M 3 8 [3 9]

UST AS a single individual makes progress in following

God, and, as he devotes himself to this endeavor, he
continually betters himself,1 so too this was the ex-
perience of an entire people. For this reason, while they were
making progress, an enhancement of the Law was made on
their behalf. Accordingly, as it is written in the Law, there are
certain precepts for priests and Levites concerning sacrifices
and the remaining rites. But since the people were making
progress (at the time when they were still capable of making
progress), the matter did not remain as first arranged, but cer-
tain, more prominent laws were made binding on them a sec-
ond and a third time.2
If someone wishes to know what laws were added for priests
and Levites, he should read the First Book of Chronicles and
patiently examine that entire catalogue of names, 3 and he
will discover there a remarkable ordering and division of the
tribes; each, in keeping with its name and place, has obtained
by lot something notable in that ritual order.4 He will find also
both the priests and the Levites arranged in distinct orders
with different duties, so that some are appointed to open the
doors of the temple, 5 others to whom the keys are entrusted,

1. Melior seipso efficitur; literally, “he is made better than himself”; I have cho-
sen “continually” to express the same idea.
2. Cf. De principiis 2.11.5 [GK 446–450]. For Origen’s understanding of
the Law, see the helpful summary of Thomas Scheck, “Law,” in The Westminster
Handbook to Origen, ed. John McGuckin (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox,
2004), 138–40.
3. Cf. 1 Chr 9.10–33.
4. Cf. 1 Chr 24.5–31; 25.8–31; 26.13–32.
5. Cf. 1 Chr 9.17–27; 26.1–19.

203
204 ORIGEN

and still others to whom care of the altars and the sacrifices is
committed.6 And, drawing on the account of that book, there
are many things that we can say regarding the duties appoint-
ed to the priests.
If one, then, is able to see clearly how the Jewish people
follow the pattern and shadow of the heavenly realities,7 he
should rise from the lower pedestal of the word to its peak and
higher pediment and contemplate on the basis of these things
the status and heavenly vocation of the priesthood to come,
and therein he will contemplate what these priestly orders are,
and what the duties of the Levites are which are carried out
in the heavenly services, and he will form a mental picture in
terms of heaven of all the things that he sees arranged here
on earth.8 For there, too, there will be the people, as well as
Levites chosen from God’s people; and in turn chosen from
among these, outstanding priests, and, nonetheless, quite nu-
merous varieties of priests; just as in the First Book of Chron-
icles it is revealed that there are t­ wenty-four orders of priests,
some indeed under Eleazar, but others under the leadership
of Ithamar, to whom those who serve daily 9 are said to be-
long.10
2. But perhaps someone who hears this might ask: “What
does this have to do with the Psalm?” A lot! For the inscription
of this Psalm is: Unto the end. A Psalm of David for Jeduthun. We
discover that this Jeduthun is one of those to whom was en-
trusted the study of and care for the hymns of God.11 Once
we discovered this name in the Psalm’s inscription, it was nec-
essary for us to show who this Jeduthun was and how, after
the first law, a second ordinance was made concerning priestly
duties.

6. 1 Chr 9.28–32.
7. Cf. Heb 8.5.
8. Cf. De principiis 2.11.5 [GK 448], where Origen suggests that the true
meaning (veritas) and significance (ratio) of the various priestly orders and the
festal cycle of Judaism will be made clear in the age to come.
9. Ephemeri = ἐφημερίαι, the division of priests appointed for daily service; cf.
1 Chr 9.33–34 and Lk 1.5.
10. Cf. 1 Chr 24.1–31.
11. Cf. 1 Chr 16.41–42.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 38 [39] 205

Among the Greeks, whoever used to compose songs or mu-

sical pieces presented them for singing to those who seemed
best to them in a contest.12 And it used to be the case that one
would be crowned in the competition, but another would write
a song for the victor. Therefore, in the Psalms of the divine
Scriptures, whichever ones are inscribed in the Septuagint as
“Unto the End” are given the title “Victory Psalms”13 by other
translators, either in reference to a victory or for a victor, obvi-
ously because of what is introduced in them as a praise of vic-
tory. Therefore, David, filled with the divine Spirit, composed
this Psalm and gave it to Jeduthun, to whom had been given
the responsibility of singing songs to God, as to one who was
quite gifted in this kind of art. It is therefore inscribed, Unto
the End. A Psalm of David for Jeduthun.
3. But now let us see what the voice of the just one has
brought forth. As if gazing at ourselves in a mirror, let us look
to see if we are capable of being like this, or whether much
is lacking in us, or if we are already quite close, although we
have not yet fully attained [our goal].14 Since, therefore, hu-
man speech is the beginning of many sins, and our mouth is
at the service of many evils, and since it is extremely difficult
for one to be found who keeps his mouth and his tongue from
sin even for one hour, it says, I have said: I will guard my ways so
that I do not sin with my tongue.15 I have said to myself and have
spoken inwardly, and I went on to say, “If I wish to preserve my
ways from sin, this is how I can do so: if I guard my tongue.”
For, “On the basis of your words,” it says, “you will be justified,
and on the basis of your words you will be condemned.”16 And
again, “Amen, I say to you, you will render an account on the
day of judgment for every idle word.”17 It speaks not only of
what you have spoken badly but what you have spoken idly, be-
cause a bad word is not idle, but accomplishes a bad work. But

12. In agone, itself a term applied also to the “contest” of the Christian life.
13. Victoriales.
14. Cf. Comm in Cant 2.5.9 [SC 375.358].
15. Ps 38.1.
16. Mt 12.37.
17. Cf. Mt 12.36.
206 ORIGEN

an idle word is one that does not accomplish anything good

or bad. If, therefore, on the day of judgment we will render an
account not only for bad words but also for idle ones, who will
boast that he has a chaste heart? Or who will say with confi-
dence, “I am clean of sin”?18
Nevertheless, the just one speaks: I have said: I will guard my
ways so that I do not sin with my tongue. I have put a guard on
my mouth.19 Elsewhere it is indeed written, “Guard your heart
with all care,” 20 but here, I have put a guard on my mouth. And
again, in another place it is written, “See that you surround
your property with a hedge of thorns.” 21 And again, “Secure
your money and your gold, and make a door and a lock for
your mouth, and a yoke and balance for your words.”22
I think that keeping these mandates—the very observance
of them, and not simply their resulting effects—makes the one
who keeps them meek and blessed.23 For as long as one always
watches his mouth and guards his tongue, so that he does not
speak before he reflects and considers within himself whether
it ought to be said; if the statement is such that it should be
uttered; if the person is such that he should or is able to lis-
ten; if the moment is right for speaking: as long as he carefully
considers each of these things, all anger and pride are kept in
check, and the strong impulse toward rage is calmed, and such
a person brings all inward deliberation to a close. So at last a
word comes forth that is marked by meekness, proceeding, as
it were, from a mind both tranquil and calm, granting favor to
those who speak and healing to those who hear.
4. But since we sin especially at that moment when the sin-
ner stands against us, instigating and provoking us to blurt
out something from our mouth for which we would be held ac-
countable in the future judgment, the holy prophet describes

18. Jb 33.9.
19. Ps 38.2.
20. Prv 4.23.
21. Sir 28.24A [= Vulgate 28.28]; in the Vulgate τὸ κτῆμα is rendered as
aures.
22. Sir 28.24B, 25B, 25A [= Vulgate 28.29].
23. Cf. Mt 5.5.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 38 [39] 207

it in this way when he says, While the sinner stood against me, I be-
came quiet and humbled myself, and kept silent about what is good.24
If, therefore, when the sinner stood against me and was speak-
ing evil of me and was slandering me, inciting me to respond
to him in the same way and to utter from my own mouth simi-
lar words, at that moment I was contemplating silence, so that
I might make no response at all.25 This is why, then, it says:
While the sinner stood against me, I became quiet and humbled myself,
and kept silent about what is good.
But sometimes if we do not wish to be humbled, we think
otherwise26 and say to ourselves, “What is this? This person
has held me in contempt and has dared to toss such insults in
my face27 and so to stir up words against me; should I too not
respond to him in like manner or even more harshly, so that
he hears something worse than what he said?” But the just per-
son does not act this way, but rather humbles himself, 28 even
if the one who slanders him and speaks abusively is a servant
or a l­ower-class, sinful, nobody.29
He says: While the sinner stood against me, I became quiet and
humbled myself, and kept silent about what is good. He did not say,
“I was silent” only, but “I was silent about what is good.” Here
it shows that although there are good things within me and
I have been educated and trained in good teachings and prac-
tices, and even if I am capable of instructing others also in
what is good, nevertheless at that moment when the sinner
stands against me and berates me with abusive and quarrel-
some words, I restrain and repress even my good words so as
neither to kindle the fire of his own destruction—since it is

24. Ps 38.2–3; humiliatus sum, understood here as a medial passive; cf. n. 28

below: humiliat se.
25. Penitus; cf. OLD s.v. § 5; this use is repeated twice more in this homily.
26. Alia, taken adverbially.
27. Ausus est talia in os ingerere: taking os here as an instance of metonymy; cf.
OLD s.v. os, § 9b.
28. Humiliat se; see n. 24 above.
29. Etiamsi servus sit ille . . . aut si humilis et peccator sit et indignus. On the iniu­
ria resulting from insulting behavior, see Andrew Borkowski and Paul du Ples-
sis, Textbook on Roman Law, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005),
340–42.
208 ORIGEN

impossible to give in to evil and simultaneously to look upon

the good—nor to cause damage by my own words.30
But why? Will the statement, While the sinner stood against
me, I became quiet and humbled myself, and kept silent about what is
good, appear as perfection, or at least progress, though not yet
perfection? For I think there are three things to be inferred
from this passage of the Scriptures, in which he says that the
sinner stands against him and whispers31 words intended to
provoke him and rouse him to retribution. And, to be sure,
if I am still young, I seek things like this, an eye for an eye, a
tooth for a tooth, 32 and I return a curse for a curse. 33 But if
I have already made some progress, though not yet perfect, I
both keep silent and endure abusive words patiently and make
no response whatsoever. But if I am perfect, I do not remain
silent, but when cursed, I bless, just as Paul also said: “We are
cursed and we bless; we suffer persecution and we endure;
blasphemed, and we make supplication.”34 And because those
who do these things (that is, who return blessings for curses
and who make supplication in the face of blasphemy) seem to
ordinary men to be like cattle and like refuse, like those who
have no awareness of the injury inflicted on them, for this rea-
son he goes on to say, “We have become like the scum of this
world, the refuse of all.”35
But we do not want to join the apostles and become the re-
fuse of this world. We would rather be feared than scorned by
others, and we are fixed on repaying those who injure us and
anticipating the vengeance the Lord has reserved to himself
when he says, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, says the Lord.”36
But if we are unable to make such progress and to attain to the
30. Sermonum meorum faciam detrimentum; or, “nor to waste my own words.”
31. Loqui in auribus suis; literally, “speak in his ears.”
32. Cf. Ex 21.24.
33. Cf. 1 Pt 3.9; cf. Hom in Ps 37.2.2–4 [SC 411.306–314].
34. 1 Cor 4.12–13.
35. 1 Cor 4.13; cf. also Tb 5.19 (LXX); this term “refuse” (περίψημα) is also
used by Ignatius of Antioch, Ephesians 8.1 [SC 10bis.64], in the context of mar-
tyrdom and sacrifice; cf. Allen Brent, A Political History of Early Christianity (Lon-
don: T&T Clark, 2009), 200–201. The substantive omnium (πάντων) is ambigu-
ous: “all things” or perhaps “all men.”
36. Rom 12.19; Dt 32.35.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 38 [39] 209

truth in its fullness so that, along with Paul, we can say, “We
are cursed and we bless; we suffer persecution and we endure;
blasphemed, and we make supplication,” let us now at least say
what we are taught through the prophet, While the sinner stood
against me, I became quiet and humbled myself, and kept silent about
what is good.37
5. And what further does it say? And my pain, it says, has been
renewed.38 Those who exchange blows in a match strive con-
stantly to ready themselves by those very blows, so that they
might endure bravely the blows inflicted by their opponents
and not be conscious of the pain; and for them this is the high-
est achievement: to receive punches and kicks without pain.
The one who is more accomplished among them, when struck
a blow, is not stung by the pain. After him is the one who in-
deed feels pain but nevertheless does not succumb to it. Un-
derstand something like this also in regard to us: when we are
cursed and the opponent stands against us, if we are indeed
well trained and mentally fortified by means of lengthy prac-
tice39 and if we are not saddened at all by curses or abusive
words, but because of an abounding firmness of purpose and
patience we are unaware, as it were, of pain and, through an
abundant meekness,40 we become in a certain way—should I
dare say it—imitators of God.41 For God is cursed by the her-
etics; he is blasphemed by those who deny his Providence; he
is accused by those who are ignorant of the treasuries of his
wisdom.42 So tell me, can you think, then, that God is in fact
grieved by all these injuries, but endures them as we do? Or
does the divine nature, in virtue of its impassibility, experience
no pain whatsoever and remain entirely unmoved by any inju-
ries or abuses?
Every just and perfect person then will be like this, or rather
will imitate such a person as the one who said, “We are cursed
37. Ps 38.2–3.
38. Ps 38.3.
39. Longa meditatione; this, of course, could also mean “meditation,” but the
context here suggests something else; cf. Hom in Ps 36.5.1 [SC 411.224].
40. Et per multam mansuetudinem, taken almost oxymoronically.
41. Cf. Eph 5.1.
42. Cf. Col 2.3; cf. Hom in Ps 37.2.8 [SC 411.322–324].
210 ORIGEN

and we bless; we suffer persecution and we endure; blas-

phemed, and we make supplication.”43 But the one who is not
yet perfect, who is nevertheless making progress, when cursed,
becomes quiet and humbles himself44 and is silent regarding
the good. But one like this does suffer pain and says, And my
pain has been renewed.45
Now imagine a wound that is being treated and, as its heal-
ing progresses, is nearly scarred over. Then, imagine anoth-
er injury being inflicted upon that wound which had already
begun to scar over, such that the wound is reopened by this
second blow. This is the kind of thing that happens to the one
who is making progress but who is not yet perfect and who has
not as yet been fully healed.46 If, then, while the skin is still
quite tender, the blows of curses and abusive words are added
to the injury,47 his pain is renewed, and he is facing great
pressures;48 and it is then with good reason that he says: While
the sinner stood against me, I became quiet and humbled myself, and
kept silent about what is good, and my pain has been renewed.49
See, then, how one who is still engaged in the struggle, who
seeks to restrain himself from wrath and rage, as long as he
meditates upon these things internally, 50 when confronted
with the sinner’s instigation51 (which indeed troubles and wea-
ries him, but does not overcome him), and though aroused

43. 1 Cor 4.12–13.

44. Cf. Hom in Ps 37.1.6 [SC 411.292–94] and n. 24 above for humiliatur as
middle voice.
45. Ps 38.3.
46. Nec iam ad summam perductus est sanitatem, literally, “nor has as yet been
led to full health.”
47. Accedant ei maledictorum et conviciorum vulnera. One is tempted to render
this, “and insults are added to injury.”
48. Et parantur angustiae, literally, “and difficulties are at hand.”
49. Ps 38.2–3.
50. Dum ipse haec apud se meditatur; an example of the influence of Stoicism
on Christianity; cf. Pierre Hadot, What is Ancient Philosophy? trans. Michael Chase
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002), 240–41, where Hadot cites
Origen, Comm in Cant 2.5.7 [SC 375.358]; on this use of meditari, cf. Hom in Ps
36.5.1 [SC 411.224].
51. Irritatio ei supervenit peccatoris. I have turned the phrase around for the
sake of flow.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 38 [39] 211

and provoked to respond, nevertheless holding his pain in

check, 52 he suppresses and curbs it. This person says, My pain
has been renewed,53 that is, “I was already making progress and
believed that I had already arrived at health before I was ag-
gravated and before I was provoked by abusive words; but now
my wound is being torn open and the abuse is renewed with
sharp pricks, while the pain of the injury is destroying my pa-
tience.”
6. But in what follows, it describes still further the suffer-
ing 54 of the one who is making progress, when it says, My heart
has grown hot within me. 55 For unlike one who has been made
perfect, unlike one who by his longstanding firmness of pur-
pose has already won happiness, when he hears the voice of
someone speaking abusively and disparagingly, it is impossible
for him to be without pain. He experiences pain and burns
internally with a heart grown hot, and he is deeply troubled,
but not to the point that he speaks from his troubled heart;
but, disturbed by the insult he has received, he indeed grows
hot internally, yet he reduces the flames of his heated passion
through silence.
7. Let us also look at another saying of the just person,
which we ought to imitate with the greatest zeal: And in my med-
itation, a fire will blaze up. 56 I too meditate on the words of the
Lord and repeatedly train myself in them, but I do not know
if I am the kind of person in the course of whose meditation
fire comes forth from each and every word of God, setting my
heart ablaze and inflaming my soul to keep those things upon
which I am meditating.
I am now speaking the words of God, but I should want
them to burn, first in my heart and then also in the minds of
those who are listening, just like those words Jesus was speak-

52. Remordens [se]; cf. OLD, s.v. [re]mordeo, § 5. Jerome, commenting on Gal
5.17, seems to use remordens (with the reflexive) in a similar way: Comm in Gal 3
[PL 26.411B]: quia fecerit, ut cum carni consenserit, et opera eius fecerit, rursum per
paenitentiam se remordens, spiritui copuletur, et opera eius efficiat.
53. Ps 38.3.
54. Passionem; perhaps more neutrally, “experience.”
55. Ps 38.4.
56. Ps 38.4.
212 ORIGEN

ing, which prompted those who had heard them to say, “Was
not our heart burning in us when he opened the Scriptures for
us along the way?”57 If only now our heart would burn within
us, as we open the divine Scriptures, and a fire be kindled in
our meditation; if only we might be roused to put what we hear
and read into action!
Such indeed were the words of Jeremiah, as it is written,
when God says to him, “Behold, I have put my words like fire
back into your mouth.”58 Why like fire? Because the words
he spoke kindled those who listened and nothing lukewarm
or cool remained in them. But just as fire consumes and de-
stroys every material and admits of nothing unclean or pol-
luted, so also those whose heart is kindled by the fire of the
divine word will no longer endure being polluted by material
or worldly dross, and they will retain nothing within them that
is lukewarm and deserving to be vomited forth, 59 nor will they
permit the charity within them to grow cold60 from repeated
acts of wickedness. But their lamps will always be lit and their
torches burning, and they will be ready like servants awaiting
their master on his return from a wedding.61
Or was it not this fire about which our Savior spoke: “I have
come to send fire onto the earth, and what is it I desire ex-
cept that it burn?”62 Without any doubt this is the fire that
drives away the chill of sin and invites the heat of the Spir-
it. This is assuredly what is also reported in the Acts of the

57. Lk 24.32; cf. Hom in Ex 12.4 [SC 321.364], where through this Lucan
text the role of Christ as mediator of meaning and the importance of prayer
receive emphasis: Unde ostenditur non solum studium nobis adhibendum esse ad dis-
cendas litteras sacras, verum et supplicandum Domino et diebus ac noctibus obsecrandum,
ut veniat Agnus ex tribu Iuda, et ipse accipiens librum signatum dignetur aperire. Ipse
est enim qui scripturas adaperiens accendit corda discipulorum, ita ut dicant: Nonne cor
nostrum erat ardens intra nos, cum adaperiret nobis scripturas.
58. Jer 5.14; the text here adds the adverb retrorsum, absent from the Vlg
and LXX.
59. Cf. Rv 3.16.
60. Cf. Mt 24.12; cf. De principiis 2.8.3 [GK 390–392], where Origen spec-
ulates on the “fall” of souls as resulting from their losing their heat or fervor.
61. Cf. Lk 12.35–36.
62. Lk 12.49.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 38 [39] 213

Apostles,63 when it says that there appeared to them separate

tongues as of fire that rested upon the apostles, for it is clear
that those who were to preach the word of the Gospel needed
to be strengthened with the gift of fiery vigor, so that the souls
of their hearers might catch fire through their ­handing-on of
the word.
But how does it happen that a tongue’s “fire” enters my
heart and that I also speak from this fiery tongue in such a way
that out of me a rapidly spreading fire is kindled by my words
in the hearts of my hearers and accuses the sinner, and that
my word becomes for him a punishment, so that, scorched and
set on fire by these words, he comes to the repentance which
achieves a reliable salvation from the sadness which is accord-
ing to God,64 which he received from the rebuke of God’s
word? If only I could kindle the soul of every listener65 in this
way, so that whoever possesses ­self-awareness, not enduring the
fire of our words, but, set aflame with all that is in him, would
destroy more quickly the filth of the vices hidden within and,
after that, abolish everything whatsoever that belongs to the
flesh and to the grosser matter belonging to it.66 Then this
fire would become in him a light and a burning lamp,67 which
should be placed “not under a bushel, but upon a lampstand
so that it might give light to all who are in the house.”68
Therefore, if the word, once heard, kindles a fire in you and
you have understood what the Apostle said, “Who is the one
who brings me joy, if not the one who is made sad by me?”69 —
for his words were fiery and the Apostle was joyful wherever
he saw someone saddened upon hearing his words and made

63. Cf. Acts 2.3.

64. Cf. 2 Cor 7.10; the editors have treated this as a direct quotation; howev-
er, the inverted word order suggests more an allusion.
65. Omnem animam auditorum; I have, for the sake of the English, transferred
the adjective.
66. Omne quidquid carnis et materiae crassioris proprium est et amicum; cf. Hom in
Ps 38.2.8 [SC 411.394–396].
67. Cf. Jn 5.35.
68. Mt 5.15; for the role of this “fire” in teaching, see Hom in Ex 13.4 [SC
321.388–392].
69. 2 Cor 2.2.
214 ORIGEN

remorseful by what he had heard and set ablaze by a fire in his

conscience from recollection of his sin, and for this reason he
said, “Who is the one who brings me joy, if not the one who is
made sad by me?”—so we should also make every effort so that
in our meditations a fire may be kindled,70 which at first burns
us by the recollection and consciousness of sin, but afterward
illumines and brightens us once we have been purged from
vice.71
8. I have spoken—it says—with my tongue.72 Let us consider
what he has said with his tongue, for through these words he
seems to me to indicate something mystical.73 He then says,
Make known to me, Lord, my end and what is the number of my days,
so that I might know what is lacking in me.74 If, he says, you make
known to me my end and how many days there are for me,
I will be able by these means also to recognize what is lacking
in me.
Or perhaps rather these words mean something like this:
that just as there is some end proper to every art—for exam-
ple, the end of construction is to build a house, the end of
­ship-building is to build a ship that can overcome the waves
of the sea and sustain the force of the winds, and for every
art there is some such end, on account of which the art itself
seems to have been devised—so perhaps too there is some
“end” for our life or even for the whole world, for the sake of
which everything that occurs in our life happens or for the
sake of which the world itself was founded or exists. This end
the Apostle also mentions when he says, “Then comes the end,
when he will have handed over the Kingdom to God and the
Father.”75 To this end we should certainly make haste, so that
our having been created by God might have meaning.76
Or, put another way, just as our bodily frame is small and,

70. Cf. Ps 38.4.

71. Peccatorum . . . vitiis [SC 411.352].
72. Ps 38.4.
73. Mysticum aliquid.
74. Ps 38.5.
75. 1 Cor 15.24.
76. Operae pretium, literally, “might be something worthwhile”; cf. OLD s.v.
pretium § 2.b.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 38 [39] 215

as it were, tiny from our birth, nevertheless it quickly presses

on and reaches toward an “end” to its growth through the in-
crements of age; or again, just as our soul, in keeping with the
fact that it exists in this body, hastens to speak, first in a stam-
mering manner, and then more clearly, and finally achieves
the capacity to speak in a full and complete way, so too in this
way our entire life is customarily spent77 stammering, as it were,
now among men on earth, but is perfected and reaches com-
pletion with God in heaven.
It is for this reason, then, that the prophet desires to come
to know his end—that for which he was made: that in envi-
sioning his end and viewing all his days and considering what
his perfection consists of, he might see how much is lacking
in him in reference to that end toward which he is striving.
For example, let us suppose an individual has been assigned to
some craft and he says to his teacher, “I want to know what the
perfection of this art is and who would be the perfect crafts-
man or builder.” And when he has learned this, he could seek
to find out how far short he is in reference to this perfection
and how much progress he has made in his training in the art,
so that when he knows the answer to each of these questions
he would know what he has achieved and recognize what is
lacking for perfection. So too the prophet now prays that he
might learn from God, that his end and the number of his
days might be made known to him.
But in this regard, it must not be thought that he is speak-
ing in reference to bodily time or in terms of the years in this
life, but he wants to know the entire number of days, those in
the first life, those in the second dwelling, and those in the
third.78 “For my soul,” he says, “has been a sojourner for a long
time.”79 It is as though those who went out from Egypt were
saying, Make known to me, Lord, my end—the land that is good80
and a ground that is holy81—and what is the number of my days
77. Imbuitur; cf. Lewis and Short, s.v. § B.1.
78. Cf. De principiis 2.11.5–7 [GK 446–454]; Hom in Ps 36.5.1 [SC 411.228–
230].
79. Ps 119.6.
80. Cf. Dt 1.25; 8.7.
81. Cf. Ex 3.5.
216 ORIGEN

during which I walk, so that I might know what is lacking in me—

how much remains until I reach the promised holy land—so,
too, he wants to know the number of days during which he is
journeying.
For we have certain days within this world, yet also certain
days outside this world. For the course of our sun, bound by the
space of this heaven,82 makes one kind of day. But the one who
is counted worthy to make an ascent to the second heaven has
another kind of day. Moreover, the one who has been able to
be taken up or reach to the third heaven83 experiences a much
brighter day, where he will not only find an ineffable light, but
will also hear “words not permitted for a human to speak.”84
I also know other “days,”85 whose number the prophet per-
haps with good reason seeks to know. Just as in this heaven,
the sun, having risen and bringing light to the entire world,
constitutes “a day,” so also in the heart of the just person
(which, due to the steadfastness and firmness of faith, is right-
ly called a “firmament”), if the Sun of Justice,86 our Lord Jesus
Christ, rises and illumines him with the light of knowledge
and truth,87 this constitutes “a day” in his heart; and the great-
er the frequency of his rising and his illumining, the greater
the number of such “days” that will be reckoned for him. Fit-
tingly, then, the prophet, aware of this kind of illumination,
says, Make known to me, Lord, my end and what is the number of my
days, so that I might know what is lacking in me.88
9. And he adds, Behold, you have made my days old.89 In Greek

82. Huius caeli spatiis terminatus; caelum, of course, can mean both the English
“sky” and “heaven.”
83. Cf. 2 Cor 12.2.
84. 2 Cor 12.4.
85. Cf. Hom in Jud 1.1–3 [SC 389.50–60] and Hom in Lev [SC 286.370] on
the significance of “day.”
86. Cf. Mal 3.20.
87. Cf. Rom 2.20.
88. Ps 38.5.
89. Ps 38.6: Ecce veteres posuisti dies meos. The LXX has παλαιάς as a variant for
παλαιστάς. Vetus, of course, is the Latin equivalent of παλαιός; however, παλαιστάς
is more correctly παλαστάς and not etymologically related to παλαιός (old), but
to παλάμη (hand). Jerome’s two versions of this verse have mensurabiles (iuxta
LXX) and breves (iuxta Hebr).
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 38 [39] 217

this is written as παλαιστάς, which indicates the measure of

four fingers. With a desire to instruct us living now in this life
and who pass days that are short and all too few, in this verse
he has spoken of what we discussed earlier. From this it is un-
derstood that one person might be able to say (as if complain-
ing about the shortness of time), “You have placed my days like
one finger,” but another, “two or three fingers.” But I ask if any
human is able to say, “My days are ten fingers,” or “twenty,” or
even more.
Since we are encountering difficult passages, I would like
to inquire if we find anything like this elsewhere in the Scrip-
tures on the basis of which that which seems obscure might
be revealed more clearly.90 I recall that this is written in Isa-
iah: “Who,” it says, “has measured water with his hand, and
the heaven with his palm, and the whole earth with his fist?” 91
From these words, the wiser among those listening should con-
sider the differences of the measurements in each individual
passage: how among those who deserve to be called “heaven,”
the part of their life that is heavenly is said to be measured
by the palm of God (whatever the “palm” of God is); and
among those whose life is still earthly, their life is measured
by the fist of God. But to ask now what is different about the
divine “fist” probably goes beyond both our homily and your
­attention-span.92
Nevertheless, just as there he “has measured water with his
hand, and the heaven with his palm, and the whole earth with
his fist, and he has weighed the mountains on the scale and
the hills in a balance,” 93 so here also, in following the same
line of reasoning, this “measure” must be understood: there is
nothing unmeasurable for God, nothing he cannot weigh, but

90. Here a fundamental hermeneutical principle of the Fathers is articulat-

ed: Scripture interprets Scripture, and the more obscure is to be interpreted in
light of what is clearer.
91. Is 40.12.
92. Sed pugilli divini differentiam nunc requirere et nostrum sermonem et auditum
vestrum fortassis excedat; perhaps alternately, “probably surpasses both our few
words and your understanding.”
93. Is 40.12.
218 ORIGEN

all things exist for him in number and measure.94 So, too, the
life of the prophet has been numbered and measured out by
God, since it is governed by the principles of his Providence.
10. He goes on in what follows to say, My substance is as
nothing before you.95 If he had not said, “before you,” I would
be quite sad indeed, because he would have been saying that
the substance of his humanity is “nothing.” But, as it is, be-
cause he said, “before you,” it is as if he were saying, “certainly
in comparison with angels or other created beings, my sub-
stance is not worthless nor of low esteem.” Indeed, if we have
lived a good life and kept the commandments of the Lord, we
are invited to join the company of the angels. “They will be,”
he says, “like the angels of God in heaven.” 96 But even if I am
Peter—“against whom the gates of hell will not prevail” 97—in
comparison with God, my substance is nothing before him.
It sufficiently expresses this with language appropriate to the
nature. For everything whatsoever—great though it may be—
that comes from nothing is nothing; for it is he alone “who
is”98 and who always “is.” Our substance, however, is as nothing
before him; for indeed it was created by him from nothing.99
11. But in what follows, in explaining what he said—my sub-
stance is as nothing before you—he adds, nevertheless, complete van-
ity is every living person.100 How do you understand “living”? If
indeed we think that true life is vanity, then why do we trouble
ourselves? But see whether perhaps101 the expression “every
living” should not be understood as referring to this present
life, as has been written and as we will establish by means of
evidence. For everything that presents itself to man in this life

94. Cf. Wis 11.20.

95. Ps 38.6.
96. Mt 22.30.
97. Mt 16.18.
98. Cf. Ex 3.14.
99. Cf. 2 Mc 7.28.
100. Ps 37.6.
101. Sed vide ne forte . . . accipiendum sit (taking ne as the negative of utrum); an
odd construction, but the meaning is clear enough from what follows; cf. Albert
Blaise, A Handbook of Christian Latin: Style, Morphology, and Syntax, trans. Grant C.
Roti (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1994), § 272b.
 HOMILY 1, PSALM 38 [39] 219

is vain, even if we consider Moses in this life: for he too knows

partially, and he prophesies partially102 and sees through a
mirror obscurely103 and knows the shadow,104 and he is taught
the types,105 and does not yet see the truth, and thus he is in-
deed living, but his life is vanity.
Do you wish to see that it is vanity? “When what is perfect
comes, those things that are partial will be destroyed.”106 Now,
everything that is destroyed is vanity. And if whatever is partial
is destroyed, and if the prophets know partially, their life too is
rightly called vanity. Moreover, the lesser things are destroyed
when those which are better and perfect come and, by com-
parison with them,107 they are proven to be vain; thus, being
partial and imperfect, they are subject to destruction. Complete
vanity, then, is every living person.108
But listen to Qoheleth, who bears witness to the fact that
this line should be understood as referring to this life: he says,
“I have praised all who have died more than all the living, as
many as are alive up to now, and the one not yet born as better
than these two.”109 He therefore praises the dead more than
the living because they at least have the advantage of having
been freed from the bonds of this world: they are no longer
clothed in flesh and skin,110 nor are they knitted together with
bones and sinews,111 and they are no longer subject to the ne-
cessities of the body. If you understand, then, what it means
to be living in the flesh (even if it were Moses or anyone else),
this life is a burden to him. For that112 which is encompassed

102. Cf. 1 Cor 13.9.

103. Cf. 1 Cor 13.12.
104. Cf. Col 2.17.
105. Figuras docetur, a curious construction; cf. Heb 8.5; cf. also 1 Cor 10.6.
106. 1 Cor 13.10.
107. Per haec; the antecedent being the substantives meliora sunt et perfecta.
108. Ps 38.6.
109. Eccl 4.2–3; Rufinus, of course, here uses the title Ecclesiastes.
110. Cf. Gn 3.21; cf. Rufinus’s metaphor in his Preface [SC 411.146]: quia nec
corpus humanum ex solis potuisset nervis ossibusque constare, nisi eis divina providentia
vel mollitiem carnis intexuisset vel blandimenta pinguedinis.
111. Cf. Jb 10.11.
112. Quae = vita.
220 ORIGEN

by this mortal and earthly body is not liberated from corrup-

tion.113
See, then, that complete vanity is every living person,114 and let
us not esteem this vain life, but let us hasten to that holy and
blessed and true life, and let us strive toward it with soul and
mind once all vanity has been destroyed. Let us not call this
light that we now employ “sweet”; for the ones who speak this
way do not know the sweetness of true light; they have not even
perceived any of the tokens of the true light, nor do they know
that the object of their hope should be the angelic life of the
soul once it escapes the vanity of this life.
For this reason, we who believe these things should already
be transferred in mind and by faith to heaven, and, even as
we walk the earth, we should maintain a heavenly manner of
life,115 so that our treasure might be there where our heart
is116 and that we might be counted worthy to attain the heav-
enly kingdom, through our Lord Jesus Christ, “to whom are
glory and power forever and ever. Amen.”117

113. Cf. Rom 8.21.

114. Ps 38.6.
115. Conversationem [= πολιτείαν]; cf. Phil 3.20; perhaps alternately, “we
should maintain our citizenship in heaven.”
116. Cf. Mt 6.21.
117. Cf. 1 Pt 4.11; Rv 5.13.
HOMILY 2, PSALM 38 [39]

S EC ON D HOM I LY ON P S A L M 3 8 [3 9]

HOUGH MAN walks in an image.1 An image is necessar-

ily an image of something. For when holy Scripture
says “image,” it sometimes specifies and says whose
image it is, but at other times it uses “image” without any
specification. Further, when it says, in reference to the Savior,
“who is the image,” it is not silent regarding whose image he
is, but says further, “who is the image of the invisible God, the
­first-born of all creation.” 2 And what is more, when it teaches
us about different images and that each and every individual
bears some image, it says: “Just as we have borne the image
of the earthly man, so let us bear the image of the heavenly
man.”3 It named the image with the addition of either “of the
earthly” or “of the heavenly.” But elsewhere it speaks without
any specification, as it even says here, Though man walks in an
image. But in whose image? God’s? Of the earthly man? Of the
heavenly man? How am I to know what the divine Scripture
intends to teach us in this passage, which says without any ad-
dition, Though man walks in an (I know not whose) image?
Indeed, if it were speaking exclusively of the just, it un-
doubtedly would have said, “Though man walks in the image
of the heavenly man.” Or, if it were referring only to sinners,
it certainly would have said, “Man walks in the image of the
earthly man.” But since it is making a statement in a general
way about all mortals, some of whom bear the image of the
heavenly (those who live according to God’s law), others of
whom bear the image of the earthly (who live according to the

1. Ps 38.7.
2. Col 1.15.
3. 1 Cor 15.49.

221
222 ORIGEN

flesh), it has then necessarily kept silent about the particular

designation of the image and has offered a general statement
about all men: every man walks in an image.
It is up to you to investigate and examine individuals on
the basis of the faith and works, the conduct and actions, the
thoughts and words of each, and to consider whether he walks
in the image of the heavenly or in the image of the earthly. If
you are merciful as your heavenly Father is merciful, then un-
doubtedly the image of the heavenly is in you. If you not only
do good to your friends, but also return good for evil to your
enemies, just as “the heavenly Father commands his sun to rise
on the good and the evil, and he rains upon the just and the
unjust,”4 then the image in you is that of the heavenly. And if
you are perfect in every way, just as your heavenly Father is per-
fect, the image in you is that of the heavenly. But, conversely, if
you are not an imitator of Christ or the Apostle Paul, who says,
“Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ,” but an imitator of the
works of the devil, who was a murderer from the beginning;5
if you have a taste for earthly things and speak of them,6 and
if your treasure and your heart are on earth,7 then you bear
the image of the earthly.
But since we have found ourselves8 in one of those passages
in which the language of “image” is employed, it seems neces-
sary to bring up as well the verse from that Psalm in which it is
written concerning sinners, “Lord, in your city you will reduce
their image to nothing.”9 It is therefore clear that, in his city,
God reduces to nothing the image of sinners; but he undoubt-
edly keeps safe and preserves the image of the just. This, then,
is the image of the earthly: the image of sinners, which God
reduces to nothing in his city. That is, if one departs from this
world10 and carries with him the image of the earthly, he will,
4. Mt 5.45.
5. Cf. Jn 8.44.
6. Si terrena sapias et terrena loquaris; or, taking sapere in a secondary sense,
“your wisdom and speech are earthly.” Cf. also Jn 3.12.
7. Cf. Mt 6.21.
8. Inventi sumus, a medial passive.
9. Ps 72.20.
10. Exierit de hoc mundo; the ambiguity in the translation is intended, for it
seems Origen means more than simply “dies.”
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 38 [39] 223

on account of such an image, be reduced to nothing in that city

of God; no one who does not bear the marks of the image of
the heavenly will have a share among the citizens of that heav-
enly city.
2. But this verse seems to me to contain another mystery11 as
well: the life and activity of this world are something i­ mage-like
and, indeed, are an image, but the life to come is not imagi-
nary; it is real. The meaning of what is said here is that each
individual possesses an image of virtue, but, strictly speaking,
he does not live wholly in virtue itself. What I am saying is this:
wisdom and knowledge are a significant part of the virtues.
Yet in this present life, if one thinks that he has knowledge, he
has not yet come to know as he is supposed to know, since the
one who knows, knows in an obscure fashion.12 Thus we walk
in an image of knowledge and not in knowledge itself, through
which there is “­face-to-face” knowing.13
We walk no less in the very image of wisdom and not yet in
wisdom itself, for we do not yet “behold the glory of the Lord
with face unveiled.”14
I venture to say the same for God’s justice, that we walk in
the image of justice and we do not yet make progress in that
justice which is “­face-to-face.” For human nature, clothed in
skin and flesh, and connected by muscle and bone,15 was un-
able—according to the capacity and strength of its own na-
ture—to understand, bear, and endure, uncovered and pure,
the very truth of justice, since indeed Christ is himself the na-
ture of the virtues.16 For he is Justice, which did not come to
11. Sacramentum.
12. In aenigmate; cf. 1 Cor 13.12.
13. Per quam facie ad faciem cognoscitur, a continued allusion to 1 Cor 13.12.
The verb is impersonal.
14. 2 Cor 3.18; cf. De oratione 9.2 [GCS 3.318–319].
15. Neque enim capere poterat humana natura pellibus et carne vestita, ossibus et
nervis inserta [SC 411.374]; cf. the comment in Rufinus’s Preface: quia nec corpus
humanum ex solis potuisset nervis ossibusque constare, nisi eis divina providentia vel
mollitiem carnis intexuisset vel blandimenta pinguedinis [SC 411.46].
16. Si quidem ipse Christus est natura virtutum. Justice is one of the ἐπίνοιαι
of Christ. In his Comm in Cant 1.6.13 [SC 375.256], Origen refers to Christ as
the “substance of the virtues”: Nec mireris sane, si dicimus virtutes esse quae diligunt
Christum, cum in aliis ipsarum virtutum substantiam Christum soleamus accipere.
224 ORIGEN

the human race in its full splendor; for Jesus Christ emptied
himself of the form of God, that he might take the form of a
servant.17
If the words of Scripture were indeed speaking only about
the Jews, it would perhaps have said, “though man walks in a
shadow.” But since, as I think, the words concern those who
are superior to those who were living according to the shadow
of the Law, it accordingly says, Though man walks in an image.
What this means will be more clearly understood from the
words of the Apostle Paul,18 who indicates that there are
three distinct aspects to the Law,19 calling them shadow and
image and truth;20 for he said, “The Law, while containing a
shadow of the good things to come, not the image itself of the
realities, is incapable, by means of the same sacrifices which
they offer each year without ceasing, of making those who ap-
proach perfect.”21 Therefore, “the Law contains the shadow of
the good things to come, not the image itself of the realities,”
demonstrating without a doubt that the image of the realities
differs from what is called the Law’s shadow. If there is some-
one capable of describing22 the worship of the Jewish religion,
he would realize that the Temple did not contain the image of
the realities, but the shadow: he would see that the altar is also
a shadow, that the goats and calves that are led to sacrifice are
17. Cf. Phil 2.7.
18. Origen generally ascribed Hebrews to Paul. It has become almost cus-
tomary to cite Origen’s reservations about Pauline authorship, as, e.g., Bruce
Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1987), 138. This view, however, has been challenged, and
Origen’s basic confidence in the Pauline authorship of Hebrews has been deftly
examined and articulated by Matthew Thomas, “Origen on Paul’s Authorship of
Hebrews,” in New Testament Studies 65 (2019): 598–609.
19. Tres quasdam species proprietatis designat in lege.
20. This is a significant statement, both for Origen’s epistemology and for
his hermeneutics. The Old Testament is the shadow, Christ is the image, and the
reality of what Christ images is understood anagogically. It would be tempting,
though perhaps overly facile, to simplify this schema: ­Literal-historical / Christo-
logical / Anagogical.
21. Heb 10.1; cf. Comm in Jn 1.39 [SC 120bis.78].
22. Describere; perhaps alternately, “deconstructing,” to use a term borrowed
from modern literary theory and philosophy; this seems to be what Origen is
suggesting.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 38 [39] 225

all a shadow, just as it is written, “our life is but a shadow upon

the earth.”23
But if someone were able to pass from this shadow, he would
come to the image of the realities, and would behold the com-
ing of Christ in the flesh, and would see him as the priest, who
even now offers sacrifices to the Father,24 and will continue to
offer them. Further, he would understand that all these things
are images of spiritual realities and that heavenly things are
signified by tangible rites. The term “image” thus refers to that
which is grasped right now and which human nature is capable
of seeing. If, with your mind and soul, 25 you are able to pass
through the heavens and to follow “Jesus, who passed through
the heavens”26 and who now stands before the face of God on
our behalf,27 you will find there those good things whose shad-
ow the Law contained and whose image Christ revealed in the
flesh; these are the things prepared for the blessed, which “eye
has not seen, nor has ear heard, nor has it arisen in the heart of
man.”28 When you see these things, you will understand that he
who walks in them and remains steadfast in his longing and de-
sire for them already walks, not in the image, but in truth itself.
Nevertheless, man walks in an image. Let me repeat the
words spoken by the Apostle, in which he points out two kinds
of images, one earthly, the other heavenly, and let us compare
them to this passage: Though man walks in an image. And let us
distinguish the specifics of what is stated in a general way, so
that when the passage is divided and broken up into its sepa-
rate elements, what lies hidden within will become clear.
This is what we say: every hostile power as well as every sin-
gle divine virtue29 that gives help to those who desire to at-
23. Cf. 1 Chr 29.15; Jb 8.9.
24. Cf. 1 Pt 2.5; Heb 10.12.
25. Mente et animo.
26. Heb 4.14.
27. Assistit nunc vultui Dei pro nobis. Cf. Heb 9.24.
28. 1 Cor 2.9.
29. Unaquaeque virtus [= δύναμις] divina, clearly juxtaposed to omnis potestas
inimica; perhaps a reference to angelic assistance. Cf. 1 Cor 15.24; Eph 1.21;
Jean Daniélou, The Angels and their Mission according to the Fathers of the Church,
trans. David Heimann (Westminster, MD: The Newman Press, 1957; repr., Al-
len, TX: Christian Classics, 1987), esp. 83–94. Without the modifiers omnis and
226 ORIGEN

tain salvation produces certain images in the soul of those who

show their receptivity to them by their various inclinations.
For example, as I have said before, all of us who are human
certainly bear an image, whether of the heavenly or of the
earthly, yet there is also a considerable diversity among these.
Every sinner, for instance, bears the image of the earthly, but
not each in the same way. For the murderer and the liar do
not bear the image of the earthly in an equal manner, nor do
the adulterer and the slanderer, the seducer of children and
the thief. Although all of these bear the image of the earthly,
there is a considerable diversity among them according to the
differences among their sins.
Having then considered the differences in the image of
the earthly, consider also the differences in the image of the
heavenly; take Paul, who bore the image of the heavenly, and
Timothy also. What do we see? Do we think that the image of
the heavenly was found in the same way in Paul as it was in
Timothy? Was there nothing greater, nothing more admirable
in Paul’s image than in Timothy’s image? As far as I am con-
cerned, Paul was greater than30 Timothy in the merit of his
life, the power of his speech, and the grandeur of his mission,
so much so that in him a greater and more splendid image of
the heavenly shone forth, that image which Christ formed in
him, since Christ spoke in him.31 Christ formed another, and,
in my opinion, lesser image in him who said: “The angel said
who spoke in me.”32 As you ponder each of these for yourself,
you will discover differences in the image, whether the earthly
among sinners or the heavenly among the holy.
Everything that we do at each hour or moment forms some
image; and for this reason we should examine each and every
one of our actions and evaluate ourselves, in this action or in
that statement, and determine whether a heavenly or an earthly

unaquaeque, one might see this as the juxtaposition of “the power of the Enemy”
with “divine strength.”
30. Secundum hoc quod praecedebat; perhaps also a reference to Paul’s greater
age.
31. Cf. 2 Cor 13.3.
32. Zec 1.14.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 38 [39] 227

image is being painted33 in our soul. But it will not seem unhelp-
ful as well to warn you that many in this world have perished on
account of the images of wicked kings—or, rather, tyrants—for
this reason alone: that tyrannical images were detected in them,
and this alone was enough to bring a charge against them. Now
then, let each one of you diligently examine himself, review the
hidden recesses of his heart, and discern carefully what images
he is bearing there. If you discover there the devil’s portrait and
the image of Satan, what escape will there be for your life, who
will have mercy upon you, when from the secret chamber of
your heart emerges the image of the tyrant?
But if you want me to be more specific in indicating imag-
es of this sort, listen: anger is an image of the tyrant, as are
greed, deceit, pride, arrogance, worldly boasting, envy, drunk-
enness, gluttony,34 and the like. If you fail to expel these from
your house very quickly, if you do not remove and scrape away
every taint of this most wicked painting from your mind,35 and
wipe away every trace of its poisonous color, the very images
will cause you to perish. This is what is to be said about the
passage: man walks in an image.
3. It continues: He stores up and knows not for whom he gath-
ers.36 If we were to do a thorough job of explaining this pas-
sage, it would have been necessary to inquire what are the
things that are being stored up without knowing for whom
they are being gathered, as well as what are the things that are
being gathered without knowing for whom they are left.37

33. Depingitur; alternately, “is being represented” or “formed”; cf. OLD s.v.
§ 4. Given the reference to the “painting” (huius picturae) of the images which
follows, “being painted” seems preferable.
34. comessationes; cf. the etymology found in ­Pseudo-Jerome, In Ep ad Rom
13 [PL 30.706] (probably the work of John the Deacon; cf. CPL 952), a gloss
on Rom 13.13: non in comessationibus et ebrietatibus, non in cubilibus et impudicitiis;
comessatio est mensae collatio.
35. A sensibus tuis; literally, “from your thoughts”; cf. OLD s.v. sensus § 9; so
Crouzel [SC 411.382]: “de tes pensées”; Prinzivalli, ed., Origene, Omelie sui Salmi
(1991), 379, more literally, “dai tuoi sensi”; the former seems more likely as the
mens or higher activity of the soul would seem to be the locus of these imagines.
36. Ps 38.7b.
37. Permanent: “remain” in the sense of “be left for”; cf. OLD s.v. § 2b; cf. also
Mt 19.21; Mk 10.21; Lk 18.22.
228 ORIGEN

And next: And now what is my hope? Is it not the Lord? 38 Just
as Christ is our Wisdom and Christ is our Justice, according
to what is written: “he who became for us Wisdom from God
and Justice and Holiness and Redemption,”39 so also our Hope,
that is, our Patience, is Christ. For this reason, “the wise man
should not glory in his own wisdom nor the strong man in his
own strength,”40 because in Christ we possess all things. Now,
then, what is my hope, that is, my patience? It is the Lord.
And my substance is from you.41 If I have a substance that con-
sists of spiritual wealth, it is from God. For “God breathed into
the face of man the spirit of life, and man became a living
soul.”42
4. Rescue me from all my iniquities.43 It is necessary that from
all be added, to make it clear that no iniquity should constrain
or hinder us. But let us consider how God rescues us from in-
iquities. If we repent of our wicked deeds and are turned back
to God, God accepts our conversion and grants forgiveness
of our iniquities according to the degree of our conversion.
For the one who is forgiven more loves more; that is why it is
said that “much has been forgiven that woman, because she
has loved much.”44 Thus the measure of forgiveness is deter-
mined by the degree of repentance. But we should not deceive
ourselves and think that these are granted without regard for
standards or judgments.
For I think that he who has fulfilled all righteousness45 is
the one who washes away all his iniquities. But the one who has
done a few deeds of righteousness or accomplished only a por-
tion of it, would cancel only a certain portion of his iniquities.
Now the one who has undertaken perfect and complete pen-
ance for all his wickedness in such a way that he can then offer

38. Ps 38.8.
39. 1 Cor 1.30.
40. Jer 9.23.
41. Ps 38.8.
42. Gn 2.7.
43. Ps 38.9.
44. Lk 7.47.
45. Omnes iustitias; in most cases I have rendered iustitia and its cognates as
“justice,” but here the context clearly calls for “righteousness”; cf. Mt 3.15.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 38 [39] 229

a pure heart to God, that person at the same time has washed
away every stain of his sins. But if his repentance was partial,
he then deserved only partial forgiveness. Since the prophet
knew all this and was aware that God indeed rescues some in-
dividuals from all their iniquities and frees others from some
of their iniquities, I think this is why he is confident that he
has acted in a way worthy of rescue from all his iniquities and
says boldly to the Lord: Rescue me from all my iniquities.46
5. You have offered me as an object of scorn to the fool.47 As long
as we have sins, it is necessary for us to be reproached by the
fool, the devil, who is our accuser.48 If our sins are found not
to be wiped away but inscribed in us by the devil’s pen, the en-
emy will reproach us for the very deeds we have done. For just
as every good deed is said to be “written not by ink, but by the
Spirit of the Living God,”49 so every wicked deed is written
with the ink and pen50 of the devil. It is for this reason that
our Lord and Savior has erased the bond51 of our sins, which
had been written against us with the devil as witness, just as he
had foretold through the prophet who said, “Behold, I will blot
out your iniquities like a cloud and your sins like the mist,”52
and “I will remember them no more.”53
So that we may not be reproached by the Fool, let us turn
46. Ps 38.9.
47. Ibid.
48. Ab insipiente et accusatore [= ὑπὸ τοῦ κατηγόρου] nostro diabolo; cf. Rv 12.10;
cf. Hom in Ps 37.2.2 [SC 411.306].
49. 2 Cor 3.3.
50. He uses the terms stylus ([reed] pen) and calamus (quill), apparently
without much difference in meaning, though, of course, stylus lends itself to the
metaphor of impressions made in or on the soul (like a tablet). In De principiis
2.11.4 [GK 446], Origen discusses the innate desire for God implanted in the
human person and how, much as in preparing a painting (the same metaphor
applied above in terms of the devil’s image), an outline of the truth is “sketched”
on the heart with the “pen” of Christ: Cum aliquis velit imaginem pingere, si ante
futurae formae lineamenta tenuis stili adumbratione designet et superponendis vultibus
capaces praeparet notas, sine dubio per adumbrationem iam inposita praeformatio ad
suscipiendos veros illos colores paratior invenitur, si modo adumbratio ipsa ac deformatio
stilo Domini nostri Iesu Christi “in cordis nostri tabulis” perscribatur.
51. Chirographum, certificate of debt. Cf. Col 2.14.
52. Is 44.22.
53. Jer 31.34.
230 ORIGEN

ourselves from all our iniquities, lest, detecting in us the stains

of sins, that is, the marks of his will, he reproach us and say,
“Look, this one was called a Christian and was marked on the
forehead with the sign of Christ, but he carried in his heart my
will54 marked with my signature!55 See, this one renounced
me and my works in baptism, and yet he was an accomplice in
my works and obeyed my laws!” Freed, therefore, from all in-
iquities, let us make every effort that, on the Day of Judgment,
we may not succumb to such reproaches of the fool, the devil.
6. I was silent and did not open my mouth; for it was you who did
this.56 We have already explained this earlier, when we treated
the verse that said, While the sinner stood against me, I became quiet
and humbled myself, and kept silent about what is good.57 Indeed,
it is good when the barbs of detraction, slander, and abuse are
hurled at us to keep in mind this verse: I was silent and did not
open my mouth; for it was you who did this.
It seems reasonable, however, to ask what it was you who did
this means, for the Psalm did not add what he had done. Yet
the Psalm’s logical sequence58 is itself instructive for us, since
it describes, as it were, a kind of struggle between us and the
sinner who stands in opposition to us; for it indicates that God
himself has done this, that is, that God caused these struggles
as an exercise for us and for the sake of our progress.59
I will therefore keep in mind that you have caused these
struggles and that it is you who have prepared these exercises
in patience for us. For when I was incited to anger, when I was

54. Meas autem voluntates; perhaps, since plural, alternately, “my purposes”
or “my designs.”
55. Meas autem voluntates et mea chirographa gerebat in corde; clearly juxtaposed
to the “sign” or “seal” of baptism borne on the forehead.
56. Ps 38.10.
57. Ps 38.2–3; cf. Hom in Ps 38.1.4 [SC 411.340].
58. Ordo [perhaps = ἀκολουθία], a technical term of exegesis meaning “co-
herence.” Cf. Bernhard Neuschäfer, Origenes als Philologe (Basel: Friedrich
Reinhardt, 1987), 244–46; and D. Dawson, “Allegorical Reading and the Em-
bodiment of the Soul in Origen,” in Christian Origins: Theology, Rhetoric, and Com-
munity, ed. Lewis Ayres and Gareth Jones (London: Routledge, 1998), 26–43.
Cf. Hom in Ps 36.3.11 [SC 411.168], where consequentia likely renders ἀκολουθία.
59. This is a clear expression of Origen’s understanding of struggle as edu-
cative or remedial.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 38 [39] 231

provoked by abusive language, in order that I not transgress

the bounds of patience nor permit any word displeasing to
you to pass from my lips: I was silent and did not open my mouth.
But if I am able to advance even further,60 following the prin-
ciples established by Paul, I will not only keep silent and not
open my mouth, but further, when cursed, I will bless, and
when blasphemed, I will entreat.61
7. Take away your blows from me; I have been worn down from the
strength of your hand.62 What the Latin translators have called
blows (plagas) is written in the Greek texts as scourges (flagel-
la),63 so that it is: Take away your scourges from me. This seems to
be what someone in the position of being corrected by scourg-
es says, since he is rebuked as a human being for his sins, or
scourged that he might be made better.
This is how many understand the passage that says: “Son, do
not be offended by God’s discipline nor grow weary when you
are rebuked by him. For God chides the one whom he loves;
he scourges every son he receives.”64 So if one is ever chided
with rebukes of this kind, it seems quite appropriate for him
to say, Take away your scourges from me; I have been worn down from
the strength of your hand. This seems to be quite fittingly related
to what is written: You have chided—or disciplined65 —man with
rebukes on account of his iniquity.66
But I also am aware of other scourges with which we are
more violently tormented, those very ones that Wisdom de-
scribes through the prophet (for indeed I call him a prophet):
“Who will give scourges to my thinking and wisdom’s rebuke to
my heart, so that they may not spare my thoughtless deeds67
60. Amplius aliquid . . . valuero profligare, taking amplius aliquid as an accusative
of extent; literally, “If I will have been able to accomplish something more,” per-
haps an echo of Rom 8.37: ἐν τούτοις πᾶσιν ὑπερνικῶμεν. The context is certainly
similar to 1 Cor 4.12, the allusion that immediately follows it.
61. Cf. 1 Cor 4.12–13.
62. Ps 38.11.
63. = μαστίγας.
64. Prv 3.11–12.
65. Vel erudisti; Origen’s gloss on the text reveals his understanding of pun-
ishment as medicinal or educative.
66. Ps 38.12.
67. Ignorationibus (ἀγνοήμασιν in LXX).
232 ORIGEN

nor ignore my sins?”68 Do you see how he prays for his heart
to be scourged for his sins and for his thoughts to be beaten?
If you ever find yourself afflicted after sin and tormented in
your heart and accused by your thoughts, if you ever observe
yourself reprimanded69 by your conscience and scourged by
its blows, take hope for yourself of improvement and salvation.
For the path to conversion is nearer to you than to those who
do not even realize that they have sinned and who are neither
saddened by their sins nor endure the scourging of their con-
science. If, then, you see yourself scourged and tormented in
your thoughts70 and recognizing the hope of salvation near
at hand, say concerning those who have sinned in the same
way, but who have not repented in like manner for their sins:
“They are not among the labors of men, and they will not be
scourged with men, since pride held them.” 71 So if you are
tormented and distressed in your heart, say to the Lord: “Many
indeed are the scourges of sinners, but mercy will surround
those who hope in the Lord.”72
Thus we have shown that scourges are prepared for men
in two ways: either externally in a manner we can feel, when
we are scourged with weariness, injuries, and various kinds of
afflictions, or also when from the recollection of an oppressive
sin, we are pierced in the heart by the sting of our conscience.
It will therefore fittingly be said in respect to either: Take away
your blows from me.
But perhaps someone says, “Granted that this kind of
prayer, which asks that external torments cease, seems helpful,
but will it also be seen to constrain the corrective sting of the
heart and mind?”
Due measure is sought in everything; even more is due mea-
sure most appropriate in regard to scourges. For if they exceed
due measure, they will harm you, even though they are them-
68. Sir 23.2; this text differs significantly from that found in the LXX and
later in the Vlg.
69. Notari; perhaps even “indict”; the sense is arguably legal.
70. Flagellari . . . in cogitationibus tuis; the text parallels Sir 23.2, in cogitatu meo
flagella.
71. Ps 72.5–6.
72. Ps 31.10.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 38 [39] 233

selves good. What am I saying about scourges? It says, “You will

find honey. Eat what suffices for you, lest perhaps having eaten
too much, you vomit.”73 For if due measure is beneficial in hon-
ey, how much more rightly is it to be sought and maintained
in scourges? This is why the Apostle, too, fearing the excessive
scourging of the heart of one who had sinned and was greatly
saddened, said: “Lest perchance one like this be overwhelmed
with even greater sadness.”74
8. You have disciplined man with rebukes for his iniquity and have
made his soul waste away like a spider’s web.75 The soul that sins
becomes heavier.76 For such is the nature of sin, and for this
reason it is written: “This people’s heart has become heavy.”77
For just as sin makes it heavy, so, conversely, virtue renders the
soul light; so (to stretch in a way the novelty of this expres-
sion)78 virtue wipes out and eliminates everything in the soul
that is corporeal and renders the soul more purely incorpore-
al.79 That, however, the soul of one who sins grows heavy and
73. Prv 25.16.
74. 2 Cor 2.7.
75. Ps 38.12.
76. Crassior; among the meanings for crassus is “dull or undisciplined,” and
it would fit Origen’s “educational” motif. The dialectic (­heavy-light) that is em-
ployed here might also be rendered as t­hick-refined. While a case might be
made for the latter, the former was chosen to make it clear that Origen is not
speaking here of a double creation (the ethereal body prior to the fall—the
embodied existence after the fall; see Henri Crouzel, Origen, trans. A. S. Worrall
[San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1989], 94–98), but rather of the condition of
the believer’s soul in this life. On this, see De principiis 2.2.2 [GK 298]: materialis
ista substantia huius modi habens naturam, quae ex omnibus ad omnia transformetur,
cum ad inferiores quosque trahitur, in crassiorem corporis statum solidioremque formatur,
ita ut visibiles istas mundi species variasque distinguat.
77. Mt 13.15, quoting Is 6.10; incrassatum is the rendering of the scriptural
ἐπαχύνθη.
78. Ut extorqueam quodammodo vocabuli novitatem; a curious, but clearly paren-
thetical, remark; Origen knows it is obviously metaphorical to assign weight to
souls, hence the remark.
79. Corporeum . . . incorpoream [probably = σωματικόν . . . ἀσώματον]. On this
important distinction in Origen, see Lawrence Hennessey, “A Philosophical Is-
sue in Origen’s Eschatology: The Three Senses of Incorporeality,” in Origeni-
ana Quinta, ed. Robert Daly (Leuven: Peeters, Leuven University Press, 1992),
373–80; on this notion of incorporeality as critical for understanding Origen’s
hermeneutic, see Brian Daley, “Origen’s De Principiis: A Guide to the Principles
234 ORIGEN

becomes, so to speak, fleshly, is indicated by what is written:

“My Spirit will not remain in these men, for they are flesh.”80
For “flesh” is undoubtedly its term for sinful and heavier souls.
If, therefore, the soul should grow heavy and become
“flesh,” it teaches what kind of remedy God has prepared: You
have disciplined man with rebukes for his iniquity, it says, and have
made his soul waste away like a spider’s web. It is thus God’s work
to effect this wasting away and to destroy everything whatso-
ever of the heavier matter that surrounds the soul, in order to
reduce and file away the “wisdom of the flesh”81 and thus at
long last to call the soul back to the refined82 understanding
of heavenly and unseen realities.
In the prophet Ezekiel, we find such realities indicated with
considerable mystery, where meats are said to be placed into
the cauldron or stockpot and boiled, and it is said that they
are cooked down and reduced, or that the meats are boiled
until the stock is thoroughly cooked down.83 This was written
in these very words, because cauldrons or stockpots, heated by
fire, will receive us, and we who have made our souls fleshly or
heavy will be thrown into them, unless we first take the initia-
tive while in this world to “reduce” our flesh through penance,
so that the heaviness of our soul will be reduced to the light-
ness of a spider’s web.84 If after this we still walk in the flesh,
we will be cast into those stockpots that are heated with wood
or hay or stubble, that is, with our own works that we have pre-
ferred to85 the foundation of Christ.86

of Christian Scriptural Interpretation,” in Vetera et Nova: Patristic Studies in Honor

of Thomas Patrick Halton, ed. John Petruccione (Washington, DC: The Catholic
University of America Press, 1998), 3–21.
80. Gn 6.3.
81. Prudentiam carnis; cf. Rom 8.7 [probably = τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκός], which
in the Vlg is rendered sapientia carnis. Cf. Hom in Ps 36.1.2 [SC 411.68]; Hom in
Ps 37.1.2 [SC 411.280].
82. Subtilem; a pun, earlier rendered “light.”
83. Cf. Ezek 24.3–5.
84. Here Origen is mixing the metaphors found in Ps 38.12 and Ezek 24.3–
5, to which he has just alluded.
85. Superposuerimus; cf. OLD s.v. § 3.c; another possible, but less likely, mean-
ing is “which we have built upon the foundation of Christ”; cf. 1 Cor 3.11.
86. Cf. 1 Cor 3.11–12.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 38 [39] 235

Jeremiah, in my opinion, says just this: “I have seen,” he says,

“the cauldron or stockpot seething, facing from the north.”87
Or again, when he saw a rod of nut wood.88 Let us inquire into
this passage, for he is showing the rod as well as the heated
stockpot at the same time for this reason, that if you were to
receive disciplines with the rod and become better, you would
not need the heated stockpot. But if you remain undisciplined
and are not made better by the rod, that is to say if you fail
to repent when verbally reprimanded or checked89 and when
rebuked by such a rod as Paul speaks of—“What do you want?
Should I come to you with a rod or in charity of spirit and gen-
tleness?” 90 —if therefore you are not made better with such a
rod, you will be cast into the stockpot, and the stockpot will be
heated. Jeremiah saw each of these at the same time—both the
rod and the stockpot; while we look at them both, we should
distinguish between them. This is why it is written: You have
made his soul waste away like a spider’s web.91
9. If, then, we relate the text to this creature, which by its na-
ture accomplishes a very subtle work and one that the eye can
barely see,92 the interpretation given above will seem appro-
priate. But if someone makes reference to what Isaiah writes in
his book, namely, “They have woven a spider’s web,” 93 it must
87. Jer 1.13; Crouzel, SC 411.398, n. 1, observes that Ambrose reproduces
the citations of Ezekiel and Jeremiah in his Enarr in Ps 38.34 [CSEL 64.208–
209].
88. Virgam vidit nuceam. Cf. Jer 1.11. Origen’s text (as translated by Rufinus)
differs significantly from the later Vulgate, which offers the sole reading vigilan-
tem. Cf. Jerome, who, in Ep 53.8 [CSEL 54.460] to Paulinus, dated between 386
and 400 AD, has virgam nuceam et ollam succensam a facie aquilonis.
89. Confutatus; an original meaning of confutare is “to check or stop the boil-
ing of a liquid,” quite à propos of the metaphor being used.
90. 1 Cor 4.21.
91. For a brief summary of Origen’s ideas about the afterlife, see the instruc-
tive article of Lawrence Hennessey, “Origen of Alexandria: The Fate of the Soul
and Body After Death,” Second Century 8 (1991): 163–78.
92. Si ergo sermonem ad naturam animalis istius retorquemus, ex illa parte qua opus
subtilissimum et quod vix oculus comprehendere potest expleat, apta videbitur expositio
ista quam superius explanavimus [SC 411.398]; this odd sentence seems to allude
to the contrast between the beauty of the spider’s web and its tenuous character,
as he is about to make clear.
93. Is 59.5.
236 ORIGEN

be understood in another way: for you should know that every-

thing which the sinner has “woven” and accomplishes is like
everything the spider weaves: it amounts to nothing, though
it seems varied and structured, and though carried out with a
subtle skill.
How numerous the webs woven by those rich who have gone
before us, who accumulated wealth with various kinds of craft-
iness and clever contrivances, who sought magistracies, offices,
and consulships in diverse ways,94 whether through ambition
or cruelty: all of these wove spider’s webs. All their deeds were
as empty and worthless as the webs of a spider, and for that
reason their souls have wasted away like a spider’s web. Nev-
ertheless, every man is vanity.95 We have already explained this
earlier.96
10. God, hear my prayer and my appeal; turn your ear to my
tears.97 Again, one should offer prayer to God with tears and be
moved to appeal to the Lord from one’s inmost being, so that
the mind, with faith in the judgment to come, might recollect
its own sins, and not without tears and weeping, since the one
who is distraught and in tears says to the Lord: “I pour out my
prayer in your sight.”98
Therefore, Turn your ears to my tears and do not be silent, he
says, from me.99 That is, do not remain silent when I pray. And
what else? Even now, as I speak, say, “I am here.”100
11. For I am a foreigner before you and a sojourner like all my ances-
tors.101 Because I am a sojourner, I must also be a foreigner, for I
am unlike you. For you alone are eternal, and we have a begin-
ning (inasmuch as one can be discovered). Yet however worthy
I may become in your sight, I nevertheless remain a foreigner
and sojourner before you: for all my ancestors were foreigners
and sojourners before you; Abraham, too, is a sojourner before

94. Diversa; here adverbial.

95. Ps 38.12.
96. Cf. Hom in Ps 38.1.11, treating Ps 38.6 [SC 411.362–366]. See pp. 219–20.
97. Ps 38.13.
98. Ps 141.3.
99. Ps 38.13.
100. Cf. Is 58.9.
101. Ps 38.13.
 HOMILY 2, PSALM 38 [39] 237

you,102 for he did not always exist, but he began to exist when
you willed it; this is true, as well, for Isaac, Jacob, and all the just.
12. Forgive me, that I may be restored before I depart and no longer
exist,103 for I am a foreigner. As long as I am with you, I have
existence. But should I depart from you, I would lose even my
very being, and I will be as one who does not exist. So for this
reason it says about those who sin: “And they will be as though
they do not exist.”104 And elsewhere: he summoned into be-
ing those things that do not exist.105 Forgive me, that I may be
restored before I depart and no longer exist.106 Nevertheless, it must
be understood that our existence—whether to exist or not—is
within our power.107 For as long as we cling to God108 and at-
tach ourselves to him who truly exists, we also have existence.
If, however, we should depart from him and cling not to our
God, we decline through vice in the opposite direction. This is
not meant to indicate the annihilation of the soul’s substance;
but the individual is called “­non-existent” when he does not
abide in the One who truly exists and who always exists; for his
existence comes from Him.
For this reason, the prophet’s word also exhorts us, when
it says: “We will follow the Lord our God, and we will cling to
him.”109 But may we ourselves also say: “My soul has clung to
you,”110 in Christ Jesus our Lord, to whom are honor and glo-
ry, forever and ever. Amen.
102. Cf. Gn 23.4.
103. Ps 38.14.
104. Ob 16.
105. Cf. Rom 4.17; Hom in Ps 36.5.7 [SC 411.254].
106. Ps 38.14.
107. Taking in nobis as the likely equivalent of ἐφ’ ἡμῖν, a term in ancient phi-
losophy employed by the Stoics to express freedom. This is a bold statement, if
construed in this way, but the context (the following lines) seems to demand it.
On this, see Charlotte Stough, “Stoic Determinism and Moral Responsibility,” in
The Stoics, ed. John M. Rist (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), 203–
30; the standard study is Albrecht Dihle, The Theory of Will in Classical Antiquity
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982), but see now the posthumously
published lectures of Michael Frede, A Free Will: Origins of the Notion in Ancient
Thought (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011).
108. Cf. Ps 72.28.
109. Jos 24.24.
110. Ps 62.9.
General Index

General Index

G E N E R A L I N DE X

Abraham, 34n143, 89, 135, 145, birthright, 148

148–49, 236 Blaise, Albert, 218n101
Adler, William, 15n51–53, 19n73, blasphemy, 38, 79, 108, 148, 208–10,
20n79 231
adoption, 92 Blosser, Benjamin, 27n112
adultery, 136, 187, 226 Blowers, Paul M., 25n104
agonistic (model), 35–37, 39n170, Body: of Christ, 96, 199; of the
40, 43–44, 68 Church, 30
Ahab, 84–85, 178 Borkowski, Andrew, 207n29
Alexandria, 5, 36 Bradshaw, Paul, 9–10
alms, 32 Brent, Allen, 208n35
Ambrose, 38n162, 39n170, 59n270, Brésard, Luc, 4, 76n2
85n48, 117n68, 142n74, 152n147, burning bush, 133, 135
235n87 Burton, Philip, 117n68
anger, 41, 45–46, 97, 99–100, 104–5, Butterworth, G. W., 13–14
112, 193–94, 206, 227, 230; of
God, 98, 175, 178–79, 182, 188–89 Caesarea, 5–8, 11–12, 17, 20n80, 36,
Antichrist, 41n179, 112 59n270
apostasy, 141 Cavadini, John, 25n104
Apostle, the. See Paul celibate, 139
Apronianus, 21–24, 75 Chadwick, Henry, 21n82, 22n91
asceticism, 22–24, 37, 44n195 charity, 33–34, 51, 67, 111, 123, 174,
Asterius, 17 212, 235
Athanasius, 17 chastity, 78, 97, 99, 130–31, 143
athlete, 37, 141–43 Chiesa, Paolo, 15n51
authority, 82, 128, 130, 141 Christ: as Equity, 64n288, 166; as
Avita, 21–24, 75n4 Head of Household, 55, 176–77;
as Holiness, 90, 94, 228; as Justice,
Bandt, Cordula, 18n64 61–64, 66, 90, 94, 97, 101, 103,
baptism, 169n123, 189n115, 230 160, 166, 223, 228; as Life, 63,
Barnes, T. D., 5n10 64n289, 66, 137, 166; as Light,
Bartelink, G. J. M., 21n85, 22n87 63–64, 93, 124, 153; as Peace,
Basil, 14n48, 17, 22 64n288, 94, 101, 116; as Physician,
Basilides, 33, 65n292, 129, 201 47, 66, 122n97, 171–72, 185; as
Behr, John, 25n104, 137n40 Power, 64n288, 136, 154; as Pro-
Bethlehem, 143 tector, 168; as Redemption,

239
240 General Index

Christ: as Redemption (cont.) Cyril of Alexandria, 17

63n286, 64n288, 228; as Resurrec- Cyril of Jerusalem, 169n123
tion, 63; as Splendor, 63; as Sun of
Justice, 64n288, 92, 124; as Teach- Daley, Brian, 25n104, 233n79
er, 160, 177, 124, 216; as Truth, Daly, Robert J., 13n45, 169n122,
57, 63, 66, 90, 94, 97, 137; as Way, 233n79
63–64, 136–37, 140, 154n1, 157; Daniel, 119, 143
as Word, 30, 33–34, 41, 48, 63–66, Daniélou, John, 29n123, 30–31,
69, 83, 87, 108–9, 115, 120n80, 169n123, 225n29
122, 124–26, 128–30, 135, 140, David, 34, 27n158, 81, 104, 144–46,
149, 153–55, 157, 161–62, 166 172, 183, 204–5
Church, 8, 12n41, 29–34, 37, 41, Dawson, David, 230n58, 49n223
48–49, 52, 54, 68–70, 113–14, Delarue, Charles, 4
118, 126, 130–31, 139n56, 141, De Lubac, Henri, 25n104, 29n123,
151n138, 155, 157, 172, 174, 185, 30n125, 130n159
188, 199–200 De Plessis, Paul, 207n29
Cicero, 15 devil, 41–42, 48, 88, 97, 100–101,
Clark, Elizabeth, 16 106, 108, 110, 112–16, 121, 137,
Codex Bezae, 117n68 140, 160, 173, 187, 193, 222, 227,
commandments, 67, 89, 110, 218 229–30; as fool, 229–30; as prince
community, 5, 9, 31, 34, 37, 41–44, of this world, 36, 60, 141, 169
49, 51, 54, 68, 123n104 Didymus, 17
company: of angels, 218; of Justice, Dihle, Albrecht, 237n107
103; of hostile, 33; of lewd, 34, Dively Lauro, Elizabeth, 29n123–24,
131, 136; of weak, 191; of wise, 30n125, 31
155 Dorival, Gilles, 17
confession, 42–44, 49, 57n263, 92, Drewery, Benjamin, 46n206
172, 186, 190–93, 198, 202
confessors, 160 educational (model), 35, 37n159, 52,
conscience, 42n187–88, 49, 59, 92, 55, 233
179, 186, 192, 201, 214, 232 Edwards, Mark J., 16n54–55, 20n81,
Consolino, Franca Ela, 14n45–46, 27n109–10, 28n115, 29n122, 30,
19n71, 22n90 35n146
conversion, 24, 37, 41, 51, 75, 141, Egypt, 58, 84, 215
179, 228, 232 Egyptians, 79, 84, 110
cooperation, 61 Eleazar, 204
Coppa, Giovanni, 6n17 Elijah, 126, 195
correction, 35, 41, 51–55, 109, 173, Elisha, 147
177–78, 197 Enemy, 113, 172, 226n29
Creator, 165, 171 envy, 76–77, 82, 85, 113, 136, 148,
Crouzel, Henri, 4, 8n28, 13–14, 169, 227
18n64, 27n109, 111, 28, 36n152, epinoiai, 61–63, 65–69
38n162, 76n2, 80n16, 82n27, Erasmus, 18–19, 76n2
90n81, 95n10, 108n3, 134n11, Esau, 143, 147–48, 150
154n5, 188n109, 200n75, 201n86, Eucharist, 12, 49, 56, 83n33, 199
227n35, 233n76, 235n87 Eunomia, 21, 23
 General Index 241

Eusebius, 5–8, 17, 85n47 heaven, 58–61, 69, 83, 92, 94, 101–2,
Evil One, 35, 41, 112–13, 115, 151, 161–62, 164, 167–68, 186, 192,
169 204, 215–20, 221–26, 234
Ezekiel, 115, 119, 234, 235n88 Heine, Ronald, 8n26, 14n48,
62n282, 172n7
faith, 28, 59, 69, 79, 98, 110, 114, Hennessey, Lawrence, 233n79,
118–19, 145, 155, 179, 195, 216, 235n91
220, 222, 230; rule of, 64, 137; heretics, 6n19, 33, 35, 39, 64–65,
shield of, 40–41, 45, 106–7, 112 104, 129, 137, 151, 165–66, 201,
false witness, 132, 136 209
Fischer, Balthasar, 12n41 Hibberd, Wulstan, 31n131
Flynn, William T., 12n41–42 Hippolytus, 6n18, 9–10, 12, 31n128
forgiveness, 92, 97, 190, 198, 201, hope, 42n188, 48, 60, 64n288, 83,
228–29 86, 89, 91–92, 98, 101–2, 113, 138,
fornication, 97, 142, 187 141, 156, 170, 195, 200, 220, 228,
Frede, Michael, 20–21 232
fruits: of good work, 127; of the Holy humility, 88
Spirit, 86, 125, 127; of justice, 87, Hurtado, Larry W., 9n29
175; of knowledge, 84 hymns, 9, 11, 120n81, 155, 204

Gehenna, 89, 167, 199 idols, 77, 79–80

Gnosticism, 26, 58n264, 64, Ignatius of Antioch, 130n156,
129n155, 137n38 159n48, 169n123, 208n35
Godin, André, 18n65 ignorance, 100, 111, 155
Goliath, 81 image, 34n142, 60–61, 69, 129, 149,
Goodman, Martin, 20n81 151n138, 221–27, 229n50
grace, 46n206, 136, 143, 146, 149, Incarnation, 25, 30, 35, 62, 136
156, 158 inheritance, 100–104, 122, 124, 131,
Grafton, Anthony, 20n80 153, 156, 161–62, 176n32
Grappone, Antonio, 16 Irenaeus, 66, 67n304, 122n97,
greed, 60, 99, 136, 148, 151, 169, 227 129n155, 139n56
Gregory of Nazianzus, 17, 22 Isaiah, 7, 41, 44n177, 82, 107n100,
guilt, 115, 184, 186, 191 119, 173, 178n43, 217, 235
Israel, 84, 115, 134n8, 184n80
Hadot, Ilsetraut, 118n70 Ithamar, 204
Hadot, Pierre, 210n50
Hale Williams, Megan, 19n72, 21n80 Jacob, 37n158, 46, 85, 135, 143, 147,
Hällström, Gunnar af, 32n132 237
Hammond Bammel, Caroline P., Janson, Tore, 75n1
4n7, 13n44, 22n87–92 Jaubert, Annie, 14n48, 21n84
Hanson, R. P. C., 29n123, 30, 171n2 jealousy, 76–82, 85, 98–99
Harl, Marguerite, 178n44 Jeduthun, 205
Harnack, Adolf, 7, 82n27 Jenkins, Claude, 77n4, 174n20
healing, 24, 29, 31, 39n170, 41, 44, Jeremiah, 37n158, 119, 143 146, 173,
47–51, 56n255, 57–58, 66, 68, 212, 235
122n97, 171–72, 190, 206, 210 Jerome, 4–6, 13, 15–16, 19–22, 24,
242 General Index

Jerome (cont.) martyrdom, 143, 160, 208n35

26n113, 85n47, 91n81, 152n147, McGuckin, John A., 38n161, 56n255,
211n52, 216n89, 235n88 62n282, 203n2
Jerusalem, 56, 125, 169 McKinnon, James W., 12n43,
Jethro, 135 120n81
Jews, 6n19, 79–80, 125, 159, 201, 224 medicinal (model), 35, 39n170,
Jezebel, 85, 135, 237 41n183, 43, 47, 51, 172n3, 231n65
Job, 37, 121, 141n69, 150, 187 meekness, 39, 45, 100–101, 104–5,
John Chrysostom, 17 108, 153, 206, 209
Judea, 125 Melania the Elder, 22
judgment, 59–60, 92–93, 117, 124, mercy, 24–25, 43, 88, 93, 121, 128,
148, 152, 157–60, 163, 168, 170, 130–31, 150–52, 174, 199, 202,
191, 196, 199, 201, 205–6, 228, 227, 232
230, 236 Merlin, J., 4n5
Justin Martyr, 173n14 Mesopotamia, 147
Metzger, Bruce, 177n36, 224n18
kerygma, 9, 27 Migne, J.-P., 4, 17
King, J. Christopher, 6n19, 29n123 military (model), 35, 36, 40, 41n183,
knowledge, 11, 42, 58, 61, 64n288, 44, 112n36
69, 70, 312, 84, 89, 107, 119–23, Mohrmann, Christine, 75n2
135, 148–50, 156, 164, 189, 216, Monaci Castagno, Adele, 8n25
223 Montanism, 10
Morgan, Teresa, 176n27
Latko, Ernest, 44n194 Morin, Germain, 5n14
Law, 26, 38, 54–55, 76, 84, 89, 110, Moses, 41, 110–11, 119, 133, 135–36,
115, 125–26, 142, 151, 154, 156, 150, 162, 177, 219
165–66, 177, 203–4, 224–25, 230; Munich Codex, 3n3, 6–8, 15,
of God, 80, 133, 138, 151, 158–59, 17–18, 20n78, 70, 79n12, 82n27,
221 130n159, 133n4, 140n61–62
Lawson, R. P., 85n48 Murphy, F. X., 13n45
Lazarus, 89, 99
Leclercq, Jean, 18n65, 77n2 Nash, Anne Englund, 25n104,
Leonides, 160n51 29n123
Levites, 203–4 Nautin, Pierre, 4–8, 10
Lewy, Hans, 85n48 Neuschäfer, Bernhard, 33n138,
liturgy, 10–12, 83n33 79n8, 230n58
Lot’s wife, 37, 139 Noah, 86
lust, 41, 112, 138, 183–84, 187; of the
flesh, 140 Onan, 149n125
Lust, Johan, 76n2 Opelt, Ilona, 5n11

Marcion, 33, 64–65, 129, 137n38, Pace, Nicolà, 14–16

151n138, 201 pain, 41, 49, 53, 96, 171–75, 179–80,
Marrou, H. I., 176n27 184, 198, 209–11
Martens, Peter W., 25n104 Palladius, 21
Marti, Heinrich, 15n51, 75n1 Pammachius, 21n85
 General Index 243

patience, 64n288, 86, 88, 95, 101–2, 18n64, 36n152, 38n162, 116n58,
125, 209, 211, 228, 230–31 160n62, 182n70, 199n68, 227n35
Paul, 9, 11, 26–27, 37, 44–46, progress, 23–24, 29, 31, 34, 35–42,
50–51, 58, 60–61, 78, 80, 83, 46, 53, 57–64, 67–69, 75, 83–84,
85–86, 95–96, 104, 108–9, 119, 87, 114, 134, 136, 139, 141n62,
122, 125, 128, 134n12, 142, 155–56, 162n73, 168, 175, 187,
144–45, 149, 154, 158, 163, 166, 203, 208, 210–15, 223, 230
172, 174–75, 180–83, 185, 187, Promised Land, 101, 134n8, 161, 216
208–9, 213–14, 222, 224–26, 231, Providence, 39, 44, 46–47, 50, 59,
233, 235 75, 98, 158, 162, 200, 209, 218
Paula, 5, 13 punishment, 51, 55, 103, 109, 125,
Paulinus of Nola, 22, 117n68, 127, 139, 157, 162, 168, 173–78,
235n88 188, 192, 198–99, 213, 231n65
pedagogical (model), 35, 52, 63, 68 purgation, 24, 198
Pelagianism, 38
penance, 24, 75, 107, 113, 142, 186, Qoheleth, 219
190, 228, 234; as public, 44
perfection, 23, 57–58, 67, 168, 208, rage, 45n204, 97, 105, 112, 206, 210
215 Rahab, 31n131
Peri, Vittorio, 6n17 Rahner, Karl, 44n194
Perrone, Lorenzo, 3n3, 6–8, 28n115, Red Sea, 110, 135, 139
82n27 repentance, 37, 40, 51, 113, 172,
persecution, 105, 147–48, 159–60, 178–79, 185, 188, 190, 194, 213,
173, 185, 208–10 228–29
Peter, 109, 149, 172, 218 revelation, 55, 58, 80
Petruccione, John, 25n104, 77n4, riches, 82, 86–87, 107, 116–20, 140,
234n79 170, 188
Pharaoh, 110 rock, 88, 136, 140, 197
philosophy, 14, 16, 24n99, 27, 64, Rondeau, Marie-Josèphe, 82n27
118, 137, 224n22, 237n107 Roti, Grant C., 218n101
piety, 12n41, 24n100, 37, 141, Rouse, W. H. D., 173n17
143n79 Rowland, Christopher, 20n81
Pitra, J. B., 17 Rufinus of Aquileia, 3, 5–6, 8, 11,
Platonism, 16, 27 13–25, 28n113, 29, 31, 70–71, 75–
Poschmann, Bernhard, 44n194 79, 88n70, 90, 94n1, 96n15, 104,
poverty, 147, 188 116n58, 128n146, 133n4, 139n53,
prayer, 11–12, 37, 97, 100, 149, 155, 141n62, 179n48, 190n1, 200n75,
172, 189, 212n57, 232, 236; the 219, 223n15, 235n88
Lord’s Prayer, 10, 56n258 Russell, Donald A., 156n12
preaching, 5–11, 17, 24, 26, 29–35, Russell, Norman, 195n37
40–41, 48, 76n2, 106, 112, 125,
130–31, 154n1, 169, 213 Sabbath, 127
Price, Simon, 20n81 sacrifice, 80, 83n33, 131, 203–4,
pride, 32, 121, 163, 206, 227, 232 208n35, 224–25
priesthood, 52, 176, 203–4, 225 Samson, 85n47
Prinzivalli, Emanuela, 3–4, 8, 15, Satan, 51, 141n69, 180–81, 227
244 General Index

Saul (king), 81 understanding, 28, 33, 67, 69, 84–

Savior, 76, 84, 101, 104, 107, 111, 85, 89–91, 100n43, 102, 111n28,
114, 127, 137n40, 159, 171, 178, 113n39, 119, 121, 122n97, 126–27,
182, 185, 212, 221, 229 134, 137, 145, 163–64, 181–82,
scandal, 43, 98, 113–15, 162, 191 185n82, 190, 203n2, 217n92, 234
seed, 86–87, 118, 148–49, 187
senses of Scripture, 26; literal, 30– Valentinians, 65n292, 104
35, 120, 123; moral, 29–35; spiri- Valentinus, 10, 33, 65n292, 129, 201
tual, 29n124, 31, 48, 64, 138n38 vanity, 192–93, 218–20, 236
Septimius Severus, 7, 17, 82n27 vengeance, 178, 193–95, 208
shame, 106, 124, 190 Vessey, Mark, 24n100
sheep, 87, 135 Viciano, Alberto, 77n4
Sheerin, Daniel, 77n4 vine, vineyard, 84–86
Shepherd of Hermas, 9n29, 54, 177n36 virtue, 37, 60–62, 87, 102, 134, 136–
Sidon, 126 37, 139–41, 143n73, 166, 193, 209,
Sinkiewicz, Robert, 44n195 223, 225, 233
Sixtus II, Pope, 22n91 Vulgate, 3n2, 76n2, 94n1, 96n15,
slander, 148, 195–96, 201, 207, 226, 102n61, 103n64, 116n58, 117n68,
230 140n61, 150n54, 175n34, 206n21–
Slusser, Michael, 11n39 22
Sodom, 139
Solomon, 99, 154, 157 Williams, A. N., 24n99
stain of sin, 96, 198, 229–30 Williams, Rowan, 62n281
Stoics, 24n99, 27–28, 210n50, wisdom, 28, 39, 56–57, 63, 64n288,
237n107 65–66, 69, 83–85, 90–91, 101–2,
118–19, 122, 135–40, 149–50,
Tertullian, 10–12 153–59, 209, 222–23, 228, 231,
theft, 136, 226 234
Theodoret, 17 works, 32–34, 90–91, 107, 119,
Theophilus of Antioch, 66, 122n97 121n88, 127–31, 140, 149, 154,
therapeutic (model), 35, 42, 47, 51, 169, 189, 222, 230, 234
68 wrath, 45, 60, 97, 99–100, 104, 108,
Thomas, Matthew, 224n18 136, 157, 169, 175, 178, 210; of a
Timothy, 61, 226 father, 176; of God, 55, 79–80,
Torjesen, Karen, 25–26, 30 178–80, 182–83, 188–89, 235n88
tree, 84, 162
Trigg, Joseph, 3n3, 5n12, 14n48, 70 Zarephath, 126
Trinity, 69, 70n312, 135 Zechariah, 173
INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE

INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE

I N DE X OF HOLY S C R I P T U R E

Old Testament
Genesis 3.6: 135 5.32: 161
1.1: 161 3.8: 101, 131 6.7: 65, 154, 157
1.2: 103 3.14: 163, 218 8.3: 88
1.6–7: 161 12.4: 212 9.3: 102
1.8: 101 12.34: 110 11.10: 84
1.10: 101, 103 13.4: 213 15.6: 150
2: 182 13.5: 161 16.3: 90, 187
2.7: 228 13.21: 110 17.6: 174
2.8: 89 14.20: 135 17.11: 161
3.15: 140 14.22–29: 110 21.8–9: 115
3.21: 219 14.25: 84 23.20: 129
4.11: 136 14.29: 110 32.8–9: 8
6.3: 234 14.31: 110 32.21: 19, 78, 79, 80
9.5a: 114 16.21–26: 127 32.35: 195, 208
9.5b: 115 19.16–25: 136
9.13–16: 114 20.5: 78 Joshua
9.20: 86 20.21: 136 24.24: 110, 237
19.17: 139 21.24: 193, 208
19.26: 139 23.22: 132 Judges
21.17–19: 148 33.13: 136 16.4: 85
23.4: 237 33.22: 136
25.8: 145 33.23: 136 1 Samuel
25.22–24: 143 18.7: 81
25.29–34: 148 Leviticus
27.27: 85 20.1–21: 177 1 Kings
28.11: 147 23.27: 188 17.6: 126
32.2–3: 147 24.20: 193 17.10–24: 126
38.9: 149 25.37: 129 18.45: 195
19.8: 126
Exodus Numbers 21: 84, 117
3.2: 135 20.17: 137 21.29: 178
3.2–3: 133
3.3: 135, 162 Deuteronomy 2 Kings
3.5: 161, 215 1.25: 161 6.16–17: 147

245
246 INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE

1 Chronicles 10.15: 121 36.28: 150, 152

9.10–33: 203 11.7: 129 36.28–29: 152–53
9.17–27: 203 16.1: 97, 36.29: 153
9.28–32: 204 16.13: 116 36.30: 56, 65, 69,
9.33–34: 204 18.9: 82 154, 157–58
16.41–42: 204 22.2: 87 36.31: 133, 138,
24.1–31: 204 22.5: 85 158–59
24.5–31: 203 24.19: 201 36.32: 159
25.8–31: 203 26.13: 161 36.33: 160
26.1–19: 203 31.10: 232 36.34: 160–61
26.13–32: 203 33.20: 168 36.35: 162–63
29.15: 225 35.9: 89 36.36: 162, 164–65
36.1: 19, 76 36.37: 166
2 Chronicles 36.1–2: 86 36.38: 167
24.21: 179 36.2: 7, 82, 84 36.39: 59, 167–68
36.3: 86 36.40: 168, 170
Tobit 36.4: 87, 90 37.1: 172
5.19: 208 36.5: 91 37.2: 52, 175, 178–
36.6: 92 80, 188–89
Esther 36.7: 94, 98 37.3: 178–79
14.11 (Vlg): 163 36.8: 99, 100, 104 37.3–4: 180
36.9: 100 37.4: 180, 182–84,
2 Maccabees 36.10: 102, 109 187
6.12–17: 184 36.11: 45, 104 37.5: 184
7.28: 218 36.12: 105 37.6: 184–85, 218
36.13: 105 37.7: 185–86
Job 36.14: 40, 45, 106, 37.7–8: 187
1.11: 121 108, 110, 114–16 37.8: 187
2.3: 150 36.15: 115–16 37.9: 187–88
8.9: 225 36.16: 116–18, 120 37.9–10: 189
10.11: 219 36.17: 120, 122 37.10: 189
19.21: 121 36.18: 122 37.11: 189
33.9: 206 36.19: 124, 127 37.12: 190–91
40.16: 187 36.19–20: 127 37.12–13: 192
36.21: 33, 35, 128, 37.13: 192–93
Psalms (LXX 131, 151 37.13–14: 193
numbering) 36.22: 131 37.14–15: 193
1.2: 126, 159 36.23: 133, 136–38 37.15: 46, 194
6.2: 175 36.23–24: 36, 141 37.15–16: 195
6.7: 141 36.24: 137, 139–40, 37.16: 195–96
7.5: 196 144 37.17: 196
9.7: 109 36.25: 146, 148 37.18: 197–98
9.30: 107 36.25–26: 34, 144, 37.19: 198–200
9.36 LXX (10.15): 151 37.20: 200–201
100 36.26: 130, 150 151 37.21: 201
10.2: 110, 112–14 36.27: 152 37.22: 202
 INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 247

37.23: 202 123.7: 138 32.24: 152

38.1: 205 138.21–22: 201 39.17: 102
38.2: 206 141.3: 236
38.2–3: 207, 209–10, 144.14: 122, 144 Isaiah
230 146.10: 170 3.1–3: 125
38.3: 209–11 3.14: 160
38.4: 211, 214 Proverbs 5.1: 84
38.5: 57, 58, 214, 1.5–6: 134 5.2: 85
216 3.11–12: 231 5.6: 125
38.6: 216, 218–20, 3.24–25: 157 5.8: 117
236 4.23: 206 6.10: 233
38.7: 60, 221, 227 9.5: 84 13.14: 138
38.8: 101, 228 9.8: 174, 193 29.13: 159
38.9: 228–29 9.9: 134 29.14: 119
38.10: 40, 230 13.8: 107, 120 40.6: 7, 82
38.11: 231 18.7: 43 40.6–7: 83
38.12: 231, 233–34, 18.17 (LXX): 193 40.8: 83
236 25.16: 233 40.12: 217
38.13: 236 29.8: 99 41.1: 160
38.14: 237 31.4 (LXX): 152 43.2: 109
39.3: 197 31.8: 154 44.22: 229
50.5: 183 49.2: 41, 107, 111–12,
50.6: 138 Ecclesiastes 178
50.13: 202 4.2–3: 219 58.5: 186
56.7: 185 5.1: 161 58.9: 236
61.6: 95 59.1–2: 103
62.9: 237 Song of Songs 59.5: 235
68.22: 164 1.4: 67, 166 59.7: 106
71.7: 104 2.5: 41, 111 59.17: 106
72.2: 133, 139, 196 60.19–20: 124
72.5: 197 Wisdom
72.5–6: 232 1.8: 102 Jeremiah
72.20: 222 2.12: 193 1.5: 146
72.28: 237 3.3: 167 1.6: 146
76.17: 103 5.4: 162 1.7: 143, 146
78.8: 97 5.9: 98 1.10: 146
80.11: 155 11.20: 218 1.11: 235
81.6: 195 1.13: 235
81.7: 196 Sirach 2.9: 160
90.2: 135 8.5: 191 2.21: 84
103.4: 135 23.2: 232 4.3: 87
103.15: 84 28.24 (Vlg 28.28): 5.14: 212
108.18: 88 206 6.30: 129
117.9: 170 28.24–25 (Vlg 8.4–5: 141
119.6: 58, 215 28.29): 206 9.23: 228
119.7: 94 31.32: 152 10.24: 178
248 INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE

Jeremiah (cont.) Hosea Zephaniah

31.34: 229 4.1: 160 1.15: 170
38.6: 173 6.6: 131
Zechariah
Ezekiel Amos 1.14: 226
3.17: 115 5.13: 126
3.18–19: 115 8.11–12: 124 Malachi
18.23: 172 3.5: 160
24.3–5: 234 Obadiah 3.20: 92, 124, 216
16: 237
Daniel
7.10–11: 110
13.45–64: 143

New Testament
Matthew 12.28: 168 26.41: 51, 182
2.16: 143 12.36: 205 26.72: 138
3.2: 167 12.37: 205
3.15: 228 13.15: 233 Mark
5.3: 114 13.18: 149 10.21: 227
5.5: 101, 104, 186, 13.19: 100
206 13.28: 100 Luke
5.8: 114, 135 13.38: 100 1.5: 204
5.9: 167 13.52: 156 10.5–6: 116
5.11: 192 15.8: 159 10.16: 132
5.15: 213 16.18: 218 12.5: 167
5.45: 123, 192, 222 17.20: 118 12.8: 190
6.2–4: 91 18.16: 174 12.35–36: 212
6.3: 92 19.12: 116 12.49: 212
6.4: 92 22.30: 218 13.27: 123
6.13: 100, 169 23.27: 191 14.11: 128
6.21: 220, 222 23.31: 159 16.9: 117
6.24: 170 23.35: 173 16.25: 89, 98–99
7.6: 185 24.12: 212 18.13: 186
7.11: 101 24.35: 102, 164, 167 18.22: 227
7.13: 168 25.16–17: 150 19.13: 130
7.14: 168 25.20: 129 19.18: 129
7.21: 94 25.22: 129
7.24: 83 25.27: 130, 151 John
8.12: 109, 197 25.35–40: 95 1.9: 93
9.12: 172, 185 25.40: 132 2.11: 123
9.13: 131 25.40–42: 132 3.12: 222
9.35: 172 25.41: 197–99 3.20–21: 91
10.28: 199 25.42: 157 4.14: 88, 102
10.40: 132 25.46: 109, 124 4.16: 96
 INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 249

4.23: 11 12.15: 199 13.10: 219

5.14: 92 12.19: 195, 208 13.11: 145, 146, 156
5.35: 213 13.13: 111, 227 13.12: 158, 219, 223
6.33: 83 13.14: 88 14.26: 9
6.35: 150 14.2: 84 14.29–30: 125
6.41: 126, 149 14.37–38: 122
6.50: 126 1 Corinthians 15.9: 186
8.39: 149 1.5: 11, 107, 119 15.24: 214, 225
8.44: 97, 222 1.6: 47, 120 15.24–28: 57
9.4: 127 1.19: 119 15.28: 37, 45, 55,
11.42: 195 1.24: 66, 122, 135– 69, 95
12.31: 36, 141, 169 36, 154 15.42: 167
12.36: 189 1.27: 80 15.49: 60, 69, 221
14.6: 90, 94, 97, 137, 1.28: 163 24.30: 90, 101
157 1.30: 90, 94, 101, 228
14.30: 169 2.6: 119 2 Corinthians
15.18: 200 2.9: 124, 158, 225 2.2: 213
15.25: 201 2.10: 158 2.5–11: 174
17.24: 167 2.13: 77 2.7: 233
19.11: 160 3.6: 125 2.8: 174
3.11: 234 3.3: 229
Acts of the Apostles 3.11–12: 234 3.6: 165
1.20: 9 3.11–13: 99 3.18: 223
2.3: 213 3.13: 50, 109 4.6: 182
13.33–35: 9 4.11–12: 148 4.10: 181
4.12: 231 4.16: 87
Romans 4.12–13: 148, 208, 4.18: 107, 113, 152,
1.28–30: 148 210, 231 163, 165
2.13: 125 4.13: 208 7.10: 185, 194, 213
2.20: 216 4.21: 235 9.8: 107, 120
3.15: 106 5.1–5: 51, 174 10.5: 119
4.17: 170, 237 5.5: 51, 69, 180–82 11.27: 144
7.14: 165 5.8: 110 11.29: 191
7.24: 185 6.13: 104 12.2: 216
8.5: 181 6.15: 187 12.2–4: 58
8.6–7: 85, 185 9.22: 191, 198 12.4: 216
8.7: 234 9.26: 142 12.10: 148
8.10: 181 10.3–11: 135 12.21: 142
8.15: 92 10.4: 88, 136, 197 13.3: 111, 130, 226
8.17: 195 10.6: 219
8.21: 220 10.22: 76, 78, 80 Galatians
8.35: 160 10.31: 152 3.3: 85
8.35–39: 147 11.30: 200 3.24: 53–54, 176–77
8.37: 231 12.8: 149 4.2: 43, 176
9.31: 80 12.27: 96 4.19: 149
11.33: 158 13.9: 219 5.17: 211
250 INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE

Galatians (cont.) 2.3: 39, 135, 150, 209 11.36–38: 144, 147,
5.22: 86, 125 2.8: 165 188
6.7: 87 2.14: 229 12.6: 197
6.8: 87 2.17: 219 12.9: 102
3.5: 181, 183 12.11: 53, 175
Ephesians 3.12: 88
1.21: 225 3.16: 9, 155 James
2.2: 60, 66, 169 1.22: 125
2.14: 94, 101 1 Thessalonians 1.27: 33, 123
3.16: 34, 42 1.19: 79 3.2: 138
4.25: 123 2.15: 159 4.7–10: 96
5.1: 209 4.17: 60
5.16: 123 5.23: 26 1 Peter
5.19: 9 1.19: 110
6.10–17: 111 1 Timothy 2.2: 145
6.12: 36, 38, 44, 46, 3.15: 157 2.5: 225
111, 141, 143, 155 4.16: 158 3.9: 193, 196, 208
6.13: 88, 172 5.23: 152 4.11: 93, 107, 220
6.13–16: 42 6.17: 170 5.8: 160
6.13–17: 40, 106 6.18: 107 5.11: 107
6.14–16: 106
6.15: 140 2 Timothy 2 Peter
6.16: 45, 107, 112, 2.4: 106 1.4: 195
114, 172–73 2.5: 37, 142
6.17: 45, 108 2.15: 125 1 John
2.19: 123 2.11: 123
Philippians 4.7: 106, 142 4.16: 96
3.13: 134, 136
3.20: 220 Hebrews Jude
1.1: 24, 76 7: 109
Colossians 10.1: 26, 55, 224
1.15: 221 10.12: 225
 R ECEN T VOLU M ES IN THE FATHER S
OF THE CHURCH SER IES
ST. EPHREM THE SYRIAN, Songs for the Fast and Pascha,
translated by Joshua Falconer, Blake Hartung, and
J. Edward Walters, Volume 145 (2022)
CASSIODORUS, ST. GREGORY THE GREAT, AND
ANONYMOUS GREEK SCHOLIA, Writings on the Apocalypse,
translated by Francis X. Gumerlock, Mark DelCogliano,
and T. C. Schmidt, Volume 144 (2022)
MOR ALIA ET ASCETICA ARMENIACA:
THE OFT-REPEATED DISCOURSES , translated by
Abraham Terian, Volume 143 (2021)
ORIGEN, Homilies on Isaiah, translated by
Elizabeth Ann Dively Lauro, Volume 142 (2021)
ORIGEN, Homilies on the Psalms: Codex Monacensis Graecus 314,
translated by Joseph W. Trigg, Volume 141 (2020)
ST. AMBROSE, Treatises on Noah and David, translated
by Brian P. Dunkle, SJ, Volume 140 (2020)
RUFINUS OF AQUILEIA, Inquiry about the Monks in Egypt,
translated by Andrew Cain, Volume 139 (2019)
ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA, Glaphyra on the Pentateuch,
Volume 2: Exodus through Deuteronomy, translated by
Nicholas P. Lunn, Volume 138 (2019)
ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA, Glaphyra on the Pentateuch,
Volume 1: Genesis, translated by Nicholas P. Lunn, with
introduction by Gregory K. Hillis,
Volume 137 (2018)
ST. MAXIMOS THE CONFESSOR, On Difficulties in
Sacred Scripture: The Responses to Thalassios, translated by
Fr. Maximos Constas, Volume 136 (2018)
 WOR K S OF OR IGEN IN THIS SER IES
Homilies on Genesis and Exodus, translated by Ronald E. Heine,
Fathers of the Church 71 (1982)
Commentary on the Gospel according to John, Books 1–10,
translated by Ronald E. Heine, Fathers of the
Church 80 (1989)
Homilies on Leviticus, translated by Gary Wayne Barkley,
Fathers of the Church 83 (1990)
Commentary on the Gospel according to John, Books 13–32,
translated by Ronald Heine, Fathers of the
Church 89 (1993)
Homilies on Luke, translated by Joseph T. Lienhard, SJ,
Fathers of the Church 94 (1996)
Homilies on Jeremiah; Homily on 1 Kings 28, translated by
John Clark Smith, Fathers of the
Church 97 (1998)
Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Books 1–5,
translated by Thomas P. Scheck, Fathers of the
Church 103 (2001)
Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Books 6–10,
translated by Thomas P. Scheck, Fathers of the
Church 104 (2002)
Homilies on Joshua, translated by Barbara J. Bruce,
edited by Cynthia White, Fathers of the
Church 105 (2002)
Homilies on Judges, translated by Elizabeth Ann Dively Lauro,
Fathers of the Church 119 (2010)
Homilies on the Psalms: Codex Monacensis Graecus 314,
translated by Joseph W. Trigg, Fathers of the
Church 141 (2020)
Homilies on Isaiah, translated by Elizabeth Ann Dively Lauro,
Fathers of the Church 142 (2021)
Homilies on Psalms 36–38, translated by Michael Heintz,
Fathers of the Church 146 (2023)