Search

Być może w 383 roku Grzegorz z Nyssy napisał mowę na Dzień Świateł, który przypadał 6 stycznia i zastępował wcześniej obchodzoną Epifanię. Wprowadzenie w Kapadocji święta Bożego Narodzenia 25 grudnia skłaniało biskupa do związania styczniowego święta z tematyką chrzcielną. W środkowej części mowy Grzegorz sukcesywnie przytacza i interpretuje dziesięć różnych wydarzeń ze Starego Testamentu, które obrazują tajemnicę chrztu. Zestawienie i interpretacja tych świadectw w kluczu typologii chrzcielnej skłania autora artykułu do przyjrzenia się źródłom inspiracji dla Grzegorzowej egzegezy i skali jej oddziaływania.

Wśród badaczy filozofii Augustyna panuje przekonanie, że zaczerpnął on pojęcie pozytywnie rozumianej nieskończoności Boga od Plotyna. Inna opinio communis utrzymuje, że Orygenes odziedziczył negatywne rozumienie nieskończoności od starożytnych filozofów i dlatego uważał moc Boga za skończoną. Niniejszy artykuł ma na celu wykazanie, że obie opinie są błędne. Chociaż Augustyn był zaznajomiony z myślą Plotyna, jego refleksje na temat nieskończoności Boga mają więcej wspólnego z tezami stawianymi przez Orygenesa niż z neoplatonizmem. U obu autorów kwestia ta pojawia się przy komentowaniu tych samych fragmentów biblijnych i obaj zmagają się z tą samą aporią wynikającą z przyjęcia doktryny o nieskończonej mocy i wiedzy Boga. Jeśli, zgodnie z logiką Arystotelesa, nieskończoność nie może być objęta przez nic, to czy boski intelekt może obejmować nieskończone idee? Odpowiedź obu autorów na to pytanie jest pozytywna. Artykuł stawia tezę, że Augustyn mógł przejąć doktrynę o nieskończoności Boga bezpośrednio od Orygenesa, ponieważ miał dostęp do wielu jego dzieł przetłumaczonych na łacinę lub za pośrednictwem Nowacjana i Hilarego z Poitiers, którzy byli pod wpływem myśli Orygenesa.

Celem niniejszego artykułu jest skonfrontowanie metody alegorezy greckiej (Heraklit Alegoreta) z alegorezą żydowską, zrekonstruowaną w oparciu o dzieła Filona Aleksandryjskiego i wczesnochrześcijańską (Orygenes). Rekonstrukcja ta pozwoliła mi, w części zatytułowanej alegoria a alegoresis, na postawienie następujących tez: po pierwsze, terminy alegoria i alegoreza, bez zasadnego powodu, stosowane są zamiennie lub mieszane. A przecież zabieg alegoryzowania (alegoria) różni się i to w sposób znaczący od metody alegoretycznej. Dlatego, postawiłem kolejne tezy: (1) o konieczności jednoznacznego odróżnienia powyższych procedur oraz (2) wprowadzenia konkretnych terminów pozwalających uchwycić różnicę między grecką, żydowską i wczesnochrześcijańską alegorezą. W tym celu wprowadziłem określenia stosowane w hermeneutyce, a mianowicie: alegoresis sacra i alegoresis prophana. W kolejnych częściach tekstu omówiłem specyficzne cechy każdego typu alegorezy starożytnej: greckiej, żydowskiej i chrześcijańskiej. Wszystkie trzy formy alegorezy mają na celu przedłożenie komentarza, który spełniałby standardy racjonalności wypracowane przez starożytną naukę (filozofię), tzn. wyeliminowania wszelkich nielogiczności, antropomorfizmów czy antropopatyzmów (w odniesieniu do Boga) oraz wydobycia z tekstu „Biblii” uniwersalnego przesłania. Różnica jaka się jednak między nimi wyłania, prowadzi do wniosku, że w przeciwieństwie do alegorezy greckiej, Filon i Orygenes postrzegają odmiennie wartość sensu dosłownego (litery tekstu) – dbając o jego zachowanie. Można zatem twierdzić, że u Orygenesa, metoda alegoretyczna uzyskała swą najpełniejszą czyli dojrzałą postać, (1) wskazując na trzy sensu tekstu: dosłowny (soma) moralny (psyche) i mistyczno-filozoficzny (pneuma) i (2) łącząc alegorezę sacra i prophana w jedną metodę odczytywania i interpretowania tekstu Pisma świętego.

Nauka Orygenesa na temat duszy, podobnie jak cała jego teologia, ma charakter hipotetyczno-poszukiwawczy. Przedmiotem artykułu jest wydobycie z jego dzieł i zebranie w całość najważniejszych idei dotyczących duszy rozumnej oraz jej roli w osobie ludzkiej. Orygenes umieszczał swoje rozważania na temat antropologii w kontekście chrześcijańskiego życia duchowego, nie traktował ich natomiast jako rozróżnienia czysto filozoficzne, chociaż nawiązywał do filozofii średniego platonizmu i Filona Aleksandryjskiego. Przeprowadzona analiza porównawcza tekstów Orygenesa, zachowanych w greckim oryginale lub wczesnochrześcijańskich łacińskich przekładach, uwypukla główne tematy jego duchowej antropologii: trychotomiczny podział struktury osoby ludzkiej, przypisywanie kategorii obrazu Boga w człowieku duszy rozumnej oraz dążenie duszy do pełnego poddania się Duchowi Świętemu, czyli osiągnięcia stanu doskonałego podobieństwa do Boga. W świetle wypowiedzi Orygenesa dusza rozumna, zwana także umysłem, sercem i zasadą przewodnią, jest istotnym elementem strukturalnym osoby ludzkiej, tożsamym z obrazem Bożym w człowieku. W życiu ziemskim toczy ona walkę duchową przeciw pożądliwościom ciała, usiłując podporządkować całego człowieka duchowi, a za jego pośrednictwem Duchowi Świętemu.

A recently discovered collection of 29 Origen's homilies on the Psalms was published in 2015. Origen delivered them in the last years of his life. We find there speculations on the borderline between philosophy and theology, which Origen never abandoned. Do they not violate the canon of homilies? Are they not dominated by a theoretical, intellectual factor? To answer these questions, the author poses a broader question in his article, namely, about the nature of communication with listeners. Did Origen, as a homilist, appeal in an integral and balanced way to all human faculties: reason, imagination, will, feelings and senses? The article has a character of a survey of the issue, since four homilies to Ps 76(77) are the subject of its analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the 20th century, there was a dispute between Protestant and Catholic scholars over the Hellenisation of Christianity, or rather the evaluation of the phenomenon of Hellenisation. According to Adolf von Harnack, Hellenisation destroyed or deformed the essence of Christianity. According to Joseph Ratzinger, on the contrary: the encounter between biblical thought and Greek philosophy helped to express the essence of Christianity adequately. Ratzinger has devoted many works to the polemic against Harnack’s thesis, pointing out that Hellenisation took place, not only after the death and resurrection of Jesus, but much earlier. However, Ratzinger does not cite many examples and arguments as confirmation of his thesis. This article is a kind of supplement to Ratzinger’s thesis. Its author shows how certain theoretical solutions arose within Hellenistic Judaism, i.e. in the time before the birth of Jesus, and how these were then used by Christians in their Christological argumentation. It was the philosophical interpretation of the Pentateuch made by Philo of Alexandria, but which also appears in the Bible itself (especially in the Sapiential Books), that helped the Fathers of the Church to perceive a pre-existent Logos in the theophanies of the Old Testament. This philosophical interpretation also gave rise to the concept of gaeneratio aeterna, i.e. the argument in favour of the eternal generation of the Son by the Father. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes selected literary motifs of Psalm 77 which were used by Origen to formulate more-than-literal interpretations. The methodology of research on the processes of creating allegorical and symbolic associations has been applied to the following literary motifs: the separation of the waters of the Red Sea, the cloud and the pillar of fire leading the Israelites through the wilderness, water from a rock, and manna from heaven. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The collection of Origen's presumably last works, the 29 homilies on the Psalms, was recently discovered and published in 2015. In the homily on Ps 76:1-9, we can find threads of the theology of spirituality intertwined with more systematic speculations. The sanctifying action of the Logos comes here to the fore. God-Logos enables the Christian to sacrifice himself fully with his mind, tongue and all his senses. The Word, which has been living for ages in the womb of the Father, educates the human word, liable to agitation, to silence. Origen looks for a cure in afflictions. He finds it in the image of hands outstretched to God and in constant reminding of Him. The Psalmist ponders "the ancient days" and "the eonic years" and asks if God can reject man forever (Ps 76:6-8). In his commentary, Origen seems to refer to his speculations from much earlier years, known from the work On First Principles, in which he expressed views on the preexistence of rational beings, preceding the present world, and the multiple transformation of worlds. Are these speculative threads still present in his last work? The article tries to explain Origen's statements and understand them properly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Studia Koszalinsko-Kolobrzeskie is the property of Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecinskiego / University of Szczecin Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Celem artykułu było wykazanie na ile homilie Orygenesa mogą być inspiracją dla współczesnego przepowiadania homilijnego? Skupiono się przy tym na formalnych aspektach przepowiadania Orygenesa. Wskazano na Orygenesa jako na mistrza duchowej interpretacji Pisma Świętego oraz „ojca” homilii egzegetycznej. Jego metodę pracy nad tekstem świętym oraz sposób komunikacji zbawczego orędzia porównano ze wskazaniami dotyczącymi homilii zawartymi we współczesnych dokumentach Kościoła i refleksji teologicznej. Przeprowadzone analizy doprowadziły do następujących wniosków: homilie Orygenesa są aktualne pod względem chrystologicznej koncentracji swej treści, duchowej interpretacji Pisma św. połączonej z otwartością na światło Ducha Świętego oraz bezpośredniego, prostego i dialogicznego stylu przepowiadania; zastrzeżenie budzi natomiast zbyt małe odniesienie do problemów życia codziennego swych słuchaczy; nie do utrzymania jest także kompozycja Orygenesowej homilii polegająca na wyjaśnieniu tekstu świętego wiersz po wierszu.

Praktyka postu religijnego w chrześcijaństwie w pierwszych trzech wiekach wydaje się być uwarunkowana kulturowo. Chrześcijański post w środy i piątki był najprawdopodobniej zapożyczeniem z praktyki Esseńczyków z Qumran (patrz Didache), w przeciwieństwie do indywidualnego postu faryzeuszy. W tym czasie chrześcijanie pościli podobnie jak Żydzi, tzn. przed chrześcijańską Paschą - od wschodu słońca poprzedniego dnia (czwartek) do zachodu słońca następnego dnia (piątek). Wydaje się, że tradycja żydowska i chrześcijańska w pierwszym wieku zbiegają się w praktyce zwiększania liczby dni postu, co motywowano w obu tradycjach apokaliptycznymi objawieniami. Jeśli chodzi o rozbieżności w tradycjach postnych, to faryzejscy Żydzi mogli przez cały dzień pościć w poniedziałki i czwartki bez jedzenia i picia od wschodu do zachodu słońca w tych dniach. Z drugiej strony chrześcijanie mogli praktykować post w środy i piątki na chlebie i wodzie, od wschodu do trzeciej. W tekstach chrześcijan aleksandryjskich z przełomu drugiego i trzeciego wieku znajdujemy syntezę praktyki chrześcijańskiej ze zwyczajami ascetycznymi i dietetycznymi filozofii stoickiej i platońskiej. Aleksandryjscy pisarze wskazywali bardziej na umiarkowanie jako cnotę i dietę jako wybór niż na post religijny jako taki. Natomiast w montanistycznych praktykach dwutygodniowej kserofagii możemy odnaleźć początek dłuższego, dwutygodniowego postu przed chrześcijańską Paschą. Kościół katolicki aż do trzeciego wieku, nazwał Wielkim Postem zwyczaj poszczenia dwa dni bezpośrednio przed Wielkanocą. Do trzeciego wieku włącznie w Kościele formalny post był postulowany stosunkowo rzadko (przed chrztem i dwa dni przed Paschą). Indywidualny post był praktykowany w środy i piątki. Wydaje się też, że dłuższy post był uznawany w Kościele aż do trzeciego wieku jako przejaw fałszywych objawień lub herezji.

Copyright of Studia Warmińskie is the property of University of Warmia & Mazury in Olsztyn and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

W swoim głównym piśmie na temat monastycznej ascezy, De monastica exercitatione, Nil z Ancyry (zm. ok. 430) stosuje wiele alegorycznych wyjaśnień Biblii, zwłaszcza Starego Testamentu. Niektóre z nich zdają się nosić ślady wpływu Orygenesa. Wpływ Aleksandryjczyka, bezpośredni lub pośredni, odnajdujemy w aluzjach Nila z Ancyry do: Rdz 3, 15, Sdz 15, 4, 1 Sm 14, 13, Ps 137 (136), 9, Lm 4, 5, Za 11, 17. O ile Orygenes stosuje alegorię w tych przypadkach na gruncie doktrynalnym i ascetycznym, to Nil z Ancyry zawęża ją na ogół do tematyki ascetycznej.

Zasygnowaliśmy najważniejsze punkty nauki Orygenesa na temat św. Józefa. Dało się zauważyć, że teolog ten nie uprawiał tego, co dziś określilibyśmy jako józefologia. Nie interesował się on wprost postacią Józefa, a wspominał o nim, gdy mówił o Chrystusie i Maryi, a szczególnie o dziewiczym poczęciu Jezusa. W centrum myśli teologicznej Orygenesa był zawsze Boski Logos, który dla zbawienia ludzi przyjął ludzką naturę. Czynnikiem, który inspirował Orygenesa do pisania o Józefie, były satyryczne pogłoski, rozsiewane przez wrogów chrześcijaństwa: podczas, gdy jedni głosili, że Jezus był synem Józefa, inni dowodzili, że został poczęty w nielegalnym związku Maryi z jakimś obcym mężczyzną pod nieobecność Józefa. By nadać waloru takim pogłoskom, wymyślono nawet imię tegoż mężczyzny (Pantera). Największym polemistą antychrześcijańskim był Celsus. Jeszcze inni, nie odrzucając wprost nauki o Bożym macierzyństwie Maryi, twierdzili, że po narodzeniu Jezusa Józef i Maryja prowadzili życie małżeńskie i że z tego związku urodzili się tak zwani bracia Jezusa i Jego siostry, o których jest mowa w Ewangeliach. W takich okolicznościach Orygenes podjął zdecydowaną polemikę z fałszywymi pogłoskami i komentował naukę zawartą w Ewangeliach na temat natury Jezusa Chrystusa, Maryi jako Jego Matki oraz św. Józefa jako Jej małżonka, ale nie w potocznym tego słowa znaczeniu.

Many historians of ideas – philosophers and theologians – believe that the first thinker to introduce the concept of a positive understanding of the infinite­ness of God was Plotinus. In Greek philosophy, however, something infinite was understood as “unfinished” and therefore “imperfect”. All the same, according to many scholars, Christianity took the concept of the infiniteness of God precisely from the founder of neo-Platonism. One of the reasons for which researchers of the doctrines of the ancient world persist in this thesis even today is the fact that, in the writings of Origen – who lived at the time of Plotinus – we find the expres­sions which might give readers the impression that God’s power is finite, since God brought into existence a finite number of created beings. This article argues that this widely-held interpretation is wrong. Philo and Clement, a Jewish and a Christian thinker, both of Alexandria – from whose doctrines Origen borrowed abundantly – wrote of an infinite God before Origen did. In the surviving works of Origen, moreover, he nowhere states explicitly that God’s power is finite, although it is true that, according to him, God created a finite number of creatures. The con­troversial thesis of a finite God is found only in fragments written by ancient cri­tics of Origen’s teaching. A detailed analysis of Origen’s own original pronounce­ments on the nature, power and knowledge of God leads one to the conclusion that the fragments that have led many historians of ideas into confusion, either do not represent the views of Origen himself or present Origen’s teachings inaccu­rately. Moreover, in Origen’s surviving Greek writings, we find the term ¥peiron used in reference to God. This is precisely the term used by Greek philosophers to designate infinity. We may posit, then, that the concept of the infiniteness of God, positively understood, was born of the encounter of Greek philosophy with the Bible – that is, with the Jewish and Christian doctrines of the first centuries of the common era. Origen, who came slightly later, continued the thought of his predecessors and does not contradict them anywhere in his surviving works. What remains to be examined is the question of whether Plotinus himself made use of the work of Jewish and Christian thinkers in forming his doctrine of an infinite God, rather than those thinkers leaning on Plotinus, as is usually assumed.

“You set charity in order in me” (Song 2:4, LXX) is one of the most funda­mental biblical texts for the concept of the ordo caritatis. The Author seeks to examine how this text was read in the East and West, analysing the commen­tary of three Greek authors (Origen, Gregory of Nyssa and Theodoret of Cyrus), and three Latin authors (Augustine of Hippo, John Cassian and Apponius). There commentaries, he notes, agree with one another for the most part, and refer more or less to Origen’s exegesis of this verse. However, some differences can be noted. The Eastern Fathers, for example, hold that, in the order of charity, the criterion of merit is more important than the criterion of blood relationship; that is to say, the greater love is to be shown to those who have been born in Christ (cf. 1Cor 4:15) over those born of the flesh. Only the Eastern Fathers explore what the ordo caritatis means also in relation to one’s enemies. The Western Fathers, for their part, tend to underline the moral aspect of the ordo caritatis, insofar as upholding that order is virtue, while infringing it is sin. In this regard, a casuistic approach can occur in their commentary more frequently than in those of the Eastern Fathers. The novelty of the commentaries of the Western Fathers is also found in their reflection on the ordo caritatis within the Holy Tri­nity, as well as the manner in which they expand the embrace of this order to other categories of people: friends, fellow citizens, strangers. Some of the Western Fathers (Apponius) apply the ordo caritatis not only to people but also to works of mercy, while others (Augustine) bring out the aesthetic element in the ordo caritatis, noting that the effect of order of any kind, including the order of charity, is beauty.

The metaphor of the sun, in which Plato (Republic 509b) compares the idea of the Good to the sun that dwells above the earth yet affects the phenomena occurring on it, was an inspiration for both heretical and orthodox theology in the first Christian centuries. The Gnostics, Clement of Alexandria and Origen all believed that God, like the Platonic idea of the Good, is radically transcendent in relation to the world, but at the same time is the cause of everything that exists in it. Unlike Plato, who believed that the idea of the Good is knowable and can be the subject of science, the Christian theologians of the first centuries believed that God was like a blinding light. This means that God, according to them, though intelligible, is unknowable in His essence. Therefore, God cannot be the subject of science. Another modification of the Platonic metaphor was the introduction of the element of sunlight, to which the philosopher from Athens did not refer. For the Gnostics, the rays of the sun were “eons” – spiritual beings that existed in the space between the first principle of all things and the material world. For Clement and Origen, the light that comes from the sun was the Son – the power and wisdom of God. In contrast to the Gnostics, who believed in the progressive degradation of the spiritual world through successive emanations, the Alexandrian Fathers believed that the Son possessed all the knowledge of God and therefore revealed to man the true God. Yet the revelation of God by the Son, and even the grace that assists human beings in the process of learning about God, do not give man complete knowledge of the essence of God. Thus the Gnostics, Clement and Origen, despite some doctrinal differences, all accepted the concept of the radical transcendence of God on the ontological and epistemological levels.

The subject of the article is the extraction and systematization of the basic aspects of Origen’s exegesis of biblical texts on the paradox of strong weakness (Mt 5, 10-11; 2Cor 12, 8-9) and embedding them in the realities of the epoch. According to Origen all human weakness – resulting both from man’s own sins and from the oppression experienced from outside – is a situation that should be used as an opportunity to take up spiritual fight and to accept God’s power, wit­hout which man is unable to overcome any difficulties. This interpretation reflects several circumstances of that era: martyr’s piety, consisting in a desire to become like Christ suffering; the necessity of finding a theological justification for various experiences that make a person in a situation of extreme weakness, such as: per­secution for faith or the practice of slavery; and finally, the conviction that the final victory is close, resulting from literally understood words of Christ about His return and the end of the world, before this generation passes away (cf. Mt 23, 34). The model of spirituality, developed on the basis of the biblical paradox of strong weakness and consisting in enduring suffering in connection with Christ and with the help of His divine power, has become an indispensable component of Christian piety also in later epochs. It could be a kind of medicine for being too attached to the own human capabilities in spiritual struggle with passions, which was the legacy of extremely conceived stoic ethics and could influence the deve­lopment of later movements limiting the power of God’s grace in the fight against own weaknesses, such as Pelagianism.

The medieval dispute over the absolute and the ordered, power of God (poten­tia Dei absoluta et potentia Dei ordinata) began with a tract by Peter Damian entitled De divina omnipotentia. One of the questions posed in this work was whether God could indeed do everything, including those things that God did not in fact do. The same question, and a similar answer, appears in Origen’s work Contra Celsum: God can do everything except that which is evil. The impossibi­lity of doing evil, however, does not diminish the omnipotence of God, because evil, is by its very nature, non-being. Beyond that, Origen, in numerous statements appearing in his exegetical works, distinguishes between the absolute power of God, which is infinite, and the power of God that creates the world and operates within it, which has a certain God-given limit – that is, this power is adapted to the abilities of the creatures who receive it. The purpose of this article is to show that, in the light of the distinction of the potentia Dei absoluta and the potentia Dei or­dinata, fragments of De principiis (II 9.1 and IV 4.8), in which a finite world and finite power of God are posited, can be interpreted in a new way. Many contem­porary scholars, on the basis of these fragments, conclude that Origen inherited from the Greek philosophers a negative understanding of infinity as something imperfect, but the analysis carried out in this article shows something different. In talking about a certain range of God’s power, which is available to creatures, or in which creatures participate only partially, Origen does not actually exclude the proposition that, in God himself, power – existing in an absolute way – can be infinite.

Origen is the exegete and Old Christian writer whose influence on the under­standing of the Bible has always been determinative. Undoubtedly, for ecclesiasti­cal reasons he deemed the Septuagint superior and regarded it as the Christian Old Testament. He thought highly of Hebrew text as well, which he often used for his research. An expression of this belief was among others the Hexapla worked out by Origen, which can be regarded as an exceptional manifestation of esteem towards the Old Testament and its Hebrew version. Origen’s attitude towards the Bible can be characterized by two approaches: on the one hand it is the ecclesiastical approach which gives the first place to the text commonly accepted in the Church namely the Septuagint, but on the other hand he is open to every other text Hebrew or Greek, trying to understand it and take it into account in his commentary.

The article systematises the metaphors ascribed by Origen (185-253/254) to the well-known female characters of the Old Testament utilising the method of allegorical exegesis of the text of Scripture. Females appearing on the pages of the historical books of Bible are – according to the Alexandrian – allegories of hu­man virtues or defects. They embody the spiritual warfare between the spirit and the body, between the mind and the feelings. In the collective sense they symbo­lize the synagogue or the church chosen from the Gentiles, and in the individual sense – the human soul in its relation to God. Origen refers to the telling names of women, translating them and embedding into the spiritual context often giving the several different allegorical meanings to the same biblical person. Despite the often-quoted in his writings beliefs characteristic to the ancient world, procla­iming that the woman is a symbol of bodily feelings and the man – a symbol of the intellectual abilities, majority of allegorical interpretations relating to the Old Testament women indicates a personification of the virtues worthy of imitation. This phenomenon is conditioned with the meaning of the names of those persons and the role attributed to them by the biblical authors, but Origen’s interpretations are original and based on his own concept of spiritual life. They deny opinions of misogyny of Origen and the early Christian writers in general.

Zagadnienie pokoju było poruszane przez autorów patrystycznych w różnorodnych kontekstach. Jednym z nich jest interpretacja określenia „człowiek pokoju” (Ps 37,37) i bliskiego mu treściowo błogosławieństwa dla ludzi „zaprowadzających pokój” (Mt 5,9). Analiza tekstów Ojców Kościoła okresu przedkonstantyńskiego dowodzi, że określenia te miały przede wszystkim znaczenie moralne, bo pokój miał stanowić element osobowości chrześcijanina. Pokój rozumiany jako wewnętrzny ład i harmonia, miał cechować każdego wyznawcę Chrystusa. Tym wewnętrznym pokojem chrześcijanin promieniuje na otoczenie. W tej koncepcji pokoju uderza brak odniesień do życia państwowego, co można tłumaczyć sytuacją chrześcijan w okresie przedkonstantyńskim. Wraz ze zmianą tej sytuacji, zmieniło się tez podejście autorów chrześcijańskich do pokoju, czego żywym dowodem jest św. Augustyn.

Composed into the letter of Ignatius of Antioch to the Church of Rome, perhaps the most famous evocation – ho emos eros estaurotai – has a long tradition of interpretation, which being initiated by Origen and taking somewhat turbulent course reaches our times. Its manifestation is visible in the translations themselves, where already from the Latin rendering a significant diversity can be observed, and the wide range of interpretations is being reflected with its spread in the modern translations. Those of Greek Fathers who spoke after Origen essentially upheld the interpretation of the Alexandrian, seeing under eros – as he did – the Christ Himself. Finally they fastened so conceptualized eros in the spiritual theology and inscribed the Ignatius’ evocation into the liturgy of the Eastern Church for ages. However in the Western Church, it seems that the significant influence on the mod­ern interpretation of the Ignatius’ evocation – starting from the nineteenth century – had the ongoing in the background discussion on authenticity of the Antiocher’s letters. The time of extensive research, beyond the contribution to the determina­tion of the middle recension, from exacting blade of critics had adjudicated about fundamental error of Origen and the other Greek Fathers in the interpretation they adopted. The dominance of the newly discovered interpretation coincided with the adoption of middle recension and spreads to the present day. The resulting dis­sonance to the voice of the ancient Church born an undying question which – al­though with different intensity at different times – continues resounding. Could the Greek Fathers be so much wrong in taking the comment to the famous Ignatius’ evocation? How is it possible that those for whom the ancient Greek was the lan­guage of everyday life, and appropriate for the letters of Ignatius „Sitz im Leben” was the environment in which in the chronological proximity they grew up and lived, diverge from the actual socio-cultural and literary context from the inside of which Ignatius spoke? These and other questions have intrigued many scholars of the last century. It is, perhaps, their echo that outlines a certain circle being formed by modern translations and commentaries, running back to the beginning, to the first interpretations. This movement, presumably, shows unextinguished disagree­ment for leaving such a significant dissonance to the voice of the ancient Church. Perhaps it is also a hunch that in the content of the Ignatius’ words there is still something else, what more clearly saw the Fathers, and what in some sense re­mains hidden from modern researchers. By the same token, following the path of these assumptions, the undertaken analysis of the Syrian translation combined with the conclusions of the recent philological study on the Greek text put a question mark on the popular interpretation and allow to hypothesize in a way that is getting closer to the voice of Fathers again. It seems that the meaning of Ignatius’ evoca­tion could have been more positive than it is used to be frequently commented.

Announcing God’s Word in connection with witnessing is the most basic of the Church’s tasks, stemming directly from its nature. In the first centuries of the Church, Christians often faced misunderstanding and persecution. This article presents quite an original conception of Origen (died ca. AD 253) concerning the issue of witnessing in its most radical form: martyrdom. Adamantios calls that the “baptism of blood”, treating it as the perfect form of advocating for Christ (imitatio Christi). Martyrdom is a projection of Christ’s paschal mystery. The baptism of blood cooperates with the passion sacrifice of the Savior in a great soteriologic process of redemption and purification of the world, leading all people to eschatological, glorious union with God in the glory of heaven. The heroic ideal of perfection outlined by Origen aimed not only at strengthening Christians during their testing and persecution, but also at reminding them of the basic task of apostolic mission: witnessing by all Christ’s believers.

Origen was one of the greatest biblical scholars of the early Church, having written commentaries on most of the books of the Bible. He recognized great au­thority of the scripture. In anthropology he gave attention to the text of saint Paul: “May the God who gives us peace make you holy in every way and keep your whole being – spirit, soul, and body – free from every fault at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1Thess 5:23). According to this text Origen recognized in hu­man being three elements. He tried to unite trichotomy with a concept of division of human being into two parts: interior and exterior man. Spirit in this concept is soul’s teacher and a special form of participation in the divine being. In a sense spirit is ontological image of God in man and for man it is impossible to lose it. Soul is the center of man in which he makes decisions. Soul was originally cre­ated in close proximity to God, with the intention that it should explore the divine mysteries in a state of endless contemplation. The body unites man with the whole created world and gives him material aspect. Origen’s anthropology is very com­plicated but more dynamic then static division on body and soul. If the soul is go­ing to spirit, it become more spiritual, otherwise if the soul is close to the body, it become more materialistic. In this view without any doubt the human soul is posed between spirit and body and is able to acquiesce the desires of spirit but is able to let itself to be led by carnal desires, too. According to Origen man is body, because is creature, which dies, but through the body is able to communicate with mate­rial world. Man is soul because lives and is able to choose. Man is spirit because is open to God and is able to recognize and love God. Trichotomic anthropology shows that ontological and moral aspects of human being permeate each other and it demonstrates the interior drama and struggle, which always exists in man.

One of the most crucial problems that split the newly developing Church was the argumentation between the baptized Jews, the Christians deriving from pagans and Gnostics mainly concerned the issue of respecting Moses Law and connected with it circumcision. That problem was deeply analyzed in the preaching of one of the most prominent Early-Christian writers and Church exegetes Origen (around 253 AD). Origen stressed that both the law of faith as well as Moses Law are strictly connected with God’s Law, which every human should respect in order to reach salvation. And neither the deeds of natural law nor Moses Law have the justification power, since this is actually given directly from Christ via our faith and christening. So humans receive the remission of sins and blessing on the basis of faith, and it is the faith that contributes to salvation. Humans, who have been given salvation, are obliged to respect the law faith in their life, which concerns all Christ’s disciples. And that should be manifested by fasting, mercy, penance, seeking wisdom, etc. We can state though that the law of faith, being God’s gift, is fundamental in a Christian’s life, and the reflection of that is justice and sainthood.

Origen from Alexandria (†253), one of the most eminent early Christian writers, is the pioneer of a very interesting theological conception of death. It is connected with his general soteriology doctrine. In the Christocentric theology of Origen, not so much death but Life itself, the synonym of the Savior, determines the principle of his interests, scientific research, and teaching. Death is a departure from Life. It separates us from God and connects with the reality destined to be doomed. The allegorical method used by the Alexandrian enabled him to identify the expression “death” with the Devil. Origen created the so-called doctrine of three kinds of death. First of them is the physical death. It is a consequence of the “paradise sin” and refers to all people. According to the classical definition, it is a separation of the soul from the body. The second one is the death by sin which leads to annihilation. The third one is the death for sin which means eternal happiness in heaven and coming back to the origins of life together with Christ. Origen hopes that at the end of times death will be conquered as the „last enemy”, and all human beings, submitted to it until now, will be purified and will return to the original unity with the Lord.

In this article the subject of metanoia was presented and the joy from conver­ted sinner in the teaching of Origen in the context of parable „the lost sheep” according the Gospel of St. Luke in chapter 15. At the foundation of the Origen’s analysis there were the problems of salvation history and eschatology connected with the apocatastatis hypothesis. The return of the primitive community will be the source of perfect joy both for the fallen human-beings (because of their sins) and for those who persisted in God’s love. Metanoia is the process connected with beneficial intervention of God in the human history. The first stage of meta­noia, by which there is the absolvation of sins, is the sacrifice which Jesus Christ offered on the cross. Man receiving God’s love should turn his attention towards God once again, recompense for his sins and give the holy fruits of convertion. The process of metanoia is not only closed during the life in this world but is still going on after our death.

L’article présente l’interprétation allégorique des textes bibliques sur la vieillesse dans l’exégèse alexandrine des III et IV siècles, principalement dans les commentaires et les homélies sur la Genèse d’Origène et de Didyme l’Aveugle. Dans ces oeuvres on trouve plusieurs textes sur les patriarches en tant que personnes âgées. Origène, en analysant les événements de la dernière période de vie d’Abraham, se concentre sur la compréhension spirituelle de la vieillesse comme la maturité et la per­fection morale. Didyme veut plutôt démontrer son érudition en arithmétique et c’est une symbolique spirituelle des nombres relative à l’âge des patriarches qui l’intéresse. Selon les deux alexandrins, chaque homme doit considérer la vieillesse non pas telle­ment comme une période plus pénible de la vie, mais avant tout comme un état de maturité morale et spirituelle, et essayer d’en arriver à ce stade. Dès lors, la vieillesse physique pourrait être mieux acceptée et serait moins douloureuse et pesante.

L’analyse de la nature et de la structure de la prière dans le traité De oratione d’Origène (vers 234), présentée dans cet article, démontre que cette oeuvre peut être considérée comme une synthèse de théorie de la prière, mais qu’elle n’est pas une conception définitive et précise de celle-ci. En suivant fidèlement l’enseignement de saint Paul (1Tm 2, 1), Origène distingue quatre genres de prière: supplication, action de grâce, imploration du pardon et louange; mais en même temps il est convaincu qu’en pratique ils ne doivent être séparés, car ils forment un act intégrale de la prière. Par exemple, l’imploration du pardon pour lui ne peut constituer à elle seule une prière autonome, mais doit être une condition nécessaire de préparation à chaque prière. De même, Origène considère l’adoration de Dieu comme un élément indispensable de chaque prière. La conception d’Origène a été reprise en Occident au Ve siècle par Jean Cassien et elle est devenue une base pour le développement postérieur de la théologie de la prière.

Pour l’auditeur de jadis et aujourd’hui lecteur, la réflexion d’Origène († 253/54) sur Abraham est organiquement liée à un appel à la réflexion, à la puissance, à la richesse et à l’efficacité de sa foi. Cette dimension existencielle de son exégèse homiletique reste toujours actuelle. Le Maître d’Alexandre enseigne surtout comment approfondir les mystères de la révélation inclus dans l’Ecriture Sainte. L’apprentissage de ce savoir-faire est pour lui beaucoup plus important que l’interprétation concrète du texte qu’il présente. Origène tient beaucoup à ce que les auditeurs sachent eux-mêmes plonger dans le texte inspiré, s’approchant ainsi mieux du Dieu vivant. Origène, attribuant à Abraham des capacités extraordinaires de connaissance, révèle sa façon gnostique de penser.

Origen (about 185-254 AD) , an outstanding theologian and scholar who, after being banned from Alexandria, set up didaskaleion in Palestinian Caesarea. This term concerns not only the early Christian educational institution with a particular teaching and upbringing conception, but also the pointed by Adamantios thought stream. At his early educational stage Origen organised logic and dialectics classes. Next he lectured sciences, mainly mathematical ones. One important element of studies in didaskaleion was teaching ethics, based on the following four virtues: justice, prudence, moderation and courage. The scholar intended not so much to share theoretical knowledge about the quoted virtues but to help students shape their life policy based on them. The main subject touched upon by Adamantios was theology preceded by philosophy lectures. The echoes of the thought stream created in Origen’s School, in spite of the Scholar himself being condemned centuries later, have gone deeply into the ecclesial science and have borne fruit till today.

La communicazione vuol presentare Origene negli scritti e discorsi di Giovanni Paolo II. Soprattutto si fa presente le citazioni dall’Alessandrino nell'enciclica Fides et ratio ed i titoli con i quali il papa lo stava nominando: „scrittore ecclesiastico”, „grande scrittore ecclesiastico”, ma anche „Padre della Chiesa”. Nei testi del papa defunto si vede anche che abbia preso da Origene la speranza della salvezza universale.

Wenn Origenes von der Existenz eines Geistes im Menschen spricht, der ais ein aus drei Elementen zusammengesetztes Wesen verstanden wird, begreift er ihn ais eine Gottes Gabe, ein góttliches Element, frei von Emotionseinflussen, das keiner Beurteilung und Strafe unterliegt. Ein Element, das sich von der Seele lóst, wenn diese das Bose veriibt. Es ist eine Quelle menschlichen Handelns, die ununterbro- chen eine Opposition zu der anderen Quelle menschlicher Aktivitat bildet, namlich zu dem Kórper.

recenzja

The author explains Origen's unusually original concept of the Word of God. From various texts by Origen, it is apparent that he understood the Words of Scripture as one of the two forms of the incarnation of the Divine Logos. The eternal Word at a particular moment of Divine activity became a person, and throughout the annals of salvation history became the word of the Bible which through Him confronts every person.

In Origens theological research, the term Church has a very wide meaning, which conveys the framework of the earthly religious institution and the community of believers. In its fundamental sense, it means the family of all rational beings created by God and His works relating to the history of angels and people. According to this Alexandrian, God created beings gifted with rational thinking, to make up one community closely bonded with Him, meaning the Church understood in a broad sense. There turned out to be an impediment to achieving this eternal plan of God because of the incorrectly used gift of free will by rational beings. The fall through sin caused a breakdown of the first heavenly and earthly Church, and at the same time initiated the long process of a return to the original state of harmony. It is divided into two stages: the Old Testament Church and the Church of Christ. The later, being the fullest manifestation of the community of united people by God in the annals of the visible world, does not have a status as the ultimate Church and only comprises an image of the eschatological reality. There will be a bringing together of the heavenly Church with the earthly Church and a complete union of rational beings with Christ. The Church understood in this way crosses the limits of the present time and becomes an everlasting reality, prepared in the preexistence and also having a continuation and fulfillment in eschatology. It is not eternity understood in an absolute way, pertaining only to God, but in the sense of a lengthy continuation which had a beginning but does not have an end. Origens ecclesiology wastonic teaching on the preexistence of the soul and the Platonic-formed in a climate of ancient Greek philosophy, under the strong influence of Platonic teaching on the preexistence of the soul and the Platonic-stoic theory of the wandering of worlds, which was a normal phenomenon in the Alexandrian environment at the turn of the II and III centuries. Despite such a dependency on erroneous philosophical theories and certain logical inconsistencies, Origen's concept of the eternal Church on many essential points turned out to be an inspiration for later Catholic ecclesiology, particularly in her ecumenical and mystical tendencies. It presents all of humanity as chosen from the beginning by God and called to be His Church. It acknowledges Christ as the foundation and Bridegroom not only of the Christian Church instituted by His incarnation, but the entire community of people for whom this Church of Christ is the visible sacramental sign and invitation to return to unity with God. It is proof that the world was created for Church which does not pass away but grows and changes, in order to finally become the perfect coronation of works as the only family under Christ as the Head, and through Him the Father of the universe.

Sur la base de sources patristiąues, l'auteur essaie de trouver une reponse a la question de savoir quelle put etre la participation de l’eveque de Rome, Pontien (230-235), au conflit provoque par l'ordination sacerdotale d'Origene. Son analyse concerne une phrase-cle de la Lettre 33 de Jeróme: „Damnatur a Demetrio episcopo; exceptis Palaestinae et Arabiae et Phoenices atque Achaiae sacerdotibus, in damnationem eius consentit orbis; Roma ipsa contra hunc cogit senatum non propter dogmatum nouitatem, non propter heresim, ut nunc aduersum eum rabidi canes simulant, sed quia gloriam eloquentiae eius et scientiae ferre non poterant et illo dicente omnes muti putabantur". L'auteur de Farticle discute certaines opinions du tivre de Pierre Nautin, Origene. Il etablit une liste des points problematiques nés du texte de Jeróme: Fobscurite de la constatation; la question de savoir pourquoi l'eveque de Romę fut informe de la decision du synode Alexandrin contre Origene; la signification du terme senatus, et le genre de decision pris par cette assemblée.

La polémique avec les Juifs au sujet de la signification de la circoncision est l’un des motifs les plus importants de l’interprétation d’Origène sur l’alliance d’Abraham. Origène prouve qu’i l n’est pas possible de comprendre la circoncision au sens corporel. Dans son argumentation il se réfère à la typologie de Paul, voyant dans les événements de l’Ancien Testament l’annonce des événements du Nouveau Testament, mais il ne développe pas ce genre de typologie. On peut même constater qu’il évite radicalement des discussions détaillées quelle que soient, en pouvant rendre concrète cette typologie. Cette concision contraste nettement avec la prédilection pour l'interprétation spirituelle. Là, Origène approche des mentions de l’Ancien Testament sur la circoncision de la bouche, des oreilles, du coeur et il interprète en détail chacune d’elles en tant qu’un appel vers la perfection. En plus il déploie cette image sur tous les membres du corps, en attribuant à chacun d’eux une signification spirituelle. En conséquence de cette orientaton chez Origène la typologie: l’alliance-le baptême soit l’alliaince-l'Eucharistie n’apparaît pas. La matière - les signes de l’alliance n’annonçaient pas de signes materiels de sacrements. Surtout l’association de la circoncision avec le baptême serait entièrement opposée a la logique de son raisonnement. Dès qu’il souligne vivement que le signe corporel de la circoncision doit être saisi dans la perspective spirituelle, il ne peut pas désigner le baptême. Pourtant le baptême est aussi le signe matériel. Telle juxtaposition reduirait alors l’Eglise au même niveau sur lequelles Juifs demeurent, cependant l’Eglise n’est pas une simple continuation de la nation juive: les Juifs saisissaient Dieu d’une façon corporelle et les chrétiens, en revanche, - d’une façon spirituelle. L’accent mis sur «la vieillesse» et non sur la perfection d’Abraham est l’élément suivant, mais de deuxième ordre, qui éloigne l’alliance de l’interpretation d’Origène du baptême. L’alliance avec Abraham annonce alors une perfection définitive, une pleine union avec le Christ.

recenzja

L'article presente les arguments pour et contre l'authenticite de l'automutilation d'Origene, en montrant a l'occasion le contexte historique du probleme de castration dans l'Eglise ancienne.

It seems there could be no connection of the biblical truth on the subject of creation with philosophy, which has never known the idea of creation. Nonetheless, several attempts have been made to unify them. The article presents three that are most renowned: of Philo, Origen and Gregory of Nyssa. They have one important feature in common: under the influence of Platonism, all three speak of dual creation.

Origen's reflections on priesthood, as well as his interpretation of the Book of Leviticus, arc based on the assumption that there exists inner priesthood which is inherent in human nature. Such priesthood means human ability to offer spiritual sacrifices to God. Origen points to the human mind as the priest in man. It is the mind that is capable of turning to God. The spiritual priesthood imposes a moral obligation on every human being. Only against this background does Origenes consider priesthood in the Old and the New Testament. The Old Testamental priesthood was established by Moses and involved the ability to make both material! and spiritual offerings. That priesthood was an anticipation of the priesthood Jesus Christ. Jesus is, at the same time, a priest and a sacrifice, thus he fulfills all the promises of the Old Testament in himself.

L'article presente les questions fondamentales de l'anthropologie patristique aux IIe et IIIe siecles: les traits caracteristiques des notions de l'image de Dieu et de la ressemblance de Dieu, et la relation entre elles. L'auteur compare deux ecrivains majeurs de cette periode: Irenee, lie avec la tradition asiatique (plus „materialiste") et Origene, representant de la tradition alexandrine (plus „spirituelle"). Dans leur doctrines il y a quelques elements presque identiques: le sens christologique de l'image (c'est le Christ qui est vraie et premiere image de Dieu); la difference sementique entre notions de l'image et de la ressemblance; le caractere statique et ontique de l'image, et active et moral de la ressemblance. Mais malgre ces points communs, Irenee et Origene comprennent autrement ces deux notions et en consequence leur doctrines anthropologiques sont differentes.