Rethinking the Rationales for Origen’s Use of Allegory (original) (raw)
Related papers
ALLEGORY AND THE INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE IN ORIGEN
Journal of Literature and Theology, 1987
Though now discredited, allegory was dominant in the ancient world as the literary mode of Platonism. Primarily didactic, it is dismissed in modern culture which rejects the metaphysical but the Bible, whose primary function is didactic, can be seen as an allegorical work even though it is based on the facts of history. For Origen, the founding father of Christian allegory, these facts have to be the images of spiritual experience and have to be woven into a coherent whole. He uses a tripartite structure of body, soul, and spirit, reflecting the historical, moral, and mystical senses of Scripture. The historical record has no value in itself only potential value through its link with God. Inconsistencies in it can be accepted. Literalism can be fatal because 'the letter killeth.' Origen bypasses typology and ignores 'progressive revelation' but relates Scripture to philosophy. His critics claim he transformed history into myth but he saw allegory as the only method worthy of scripture. Unlike the heretics who also used allegory, Origen defends Biblical history while insisting it has to be more than occurrence without meaning. His use of allegory was safeguarded by his belief in the unity of Scripture, by his interpretation of Scripture by Scripture, and by his relating of Scripture to the mind of the Church. For him the Word of God is veiled in the letter of the text just as Christ was veiled in the flesh.
Biblical interpretation is a field of perennial relevance, and poor approaches to the scriptures continue to be major stumbling blocks in Christianity’s self-understanding as well as in its relation to the rest of the world. From the most basic questions about a “literal” Adam and Eve to complex discussions about hermeneutical methodology, nothing seems to divide those who identify as Christian or confuse those who do not more than the all-encompassing question of how to read the Bible correctly. It is my aim to examine Origen’s approach to Biblical interpretation as one of the earliest attempts to do so. Coming as he does in a time before established creeds, councils, or even a settled canon of scripture, Origen’s approach is a window into one of the most primitive, and influential, takes on Biblical exegesis, one that goes on to influence the entire interpretive tradition, both east and west. In my paper I will give a very brief summary of Origen’s discussion on scripture in his On First Principles, including the major problem for Origen – the problem of the text’s obscurity and the ineffectualness of a purely “literal” reading – and outline Origen’s proposed solution. However, I will go on to argue that we cannot really appreciate the power of this solution unless we understand his epistemological and hermeneutical presuppositions, ones that are quite alien to modern methodology (whether secular, or, in many cases, Christian), and that by immersing ourselves in a thoroughly ancient way of thinking we can reap far greater fruit from our study of the Biblical texts.
New Testament Studies, 2024
In this paper, I examine several sources of authority to which Origen laid claim as he set about the task of interpreting scripture. On occasion, in both his commentaries and his homilies, Origen provided accounts of his access to three different, though connected sources of authority that contributed to his self-presentation as an expert interpreter. These sources are as follows: 1) participation in the lineage of the apostles, particularly his exegetical role model, Paul. The second source of authority is a result of the first: 2) direct communication from the Logos, whom he understands to be Christ himself, and 3) angelic assistance and engagement with his pastoral exegetical project. In some instances, Origen even claimed to be on par with two of these sources of authority; he can be found claiming to have exegetical abilities similar to Paul's and, on some rare occasions, to have reached the same epistemological level as the angels. This analysis provides us not only with a case study of the kind of self-fashioning and authorising strategies used by elite scriptural exegetes in the first few centuries of the common era, but it also allows us to shift our focus away from exegetical methods towards the figure, personality and social position of the exegete him or herself. From this shift of focus we gain a better appreciation of a topic to which exegetical authors themselves dedicated considerable energy: just who it was that could occupy the office of authoritative Christian exegete and why.
On aspects of a proto-phenomenology of Scripture in Origen
Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie, 2018
Although he was not and could not have been a phenomenologist in the proper sense of the term, the writings of Origen of Alexandria contain certain insightful observations about the way in which Scripture is encountered in lived experience, and these can be fruitfully interpreted from a phenomenological perspective. The object of this essay is to present two aspects of Origen's " proto-phenomenology of Scripture " and to draw from them a conclusion of theological-methodological import. The discussion will revolve around a phenomenological distinction between Scripture and biblical text, a distinction which, though familiar to previous writers, has not yet been fully appreciated. Zusammenfassung: Auch wenn der Alexandriner Origenes kein Phänomenologe im eigentlichen Sinne war und sein konnte, so enthalten seine Werke doch gewisse Einsichten darüber, wie die Heilige Schrift als " Erlebnis " erfahren werden kann, so dass diese aus einer phänomenologischen Perspektive fruchtbar gemacht werden können. Das Ziel dieses Aufsatzes ist es, zwei Aspekte dieser " Proto-Phänomeno-logie der Schrift " bei Origenes aufzuzeigen, um daraus Schlüsse von theologisch-methodologischer Relevanz zu ziehen. Die Diskussion wird sich dabei vorrangig um die phänomenologische Unterscheidung zwischen Heiliger Schrift und Bibel-text drehen, eine Unterscheidung die, obwohl sie vorhergehenden Autoren durch-aus geläufig scheint, bislang noch nicht ausreichend gewürdigt worden ist.