SOURCE: "Spokesman for Truth (Continued): Christian Preachers," in The Art of Rhetoric in Alexandria: Its Theory and Practice in the Ancient World. Martinus Nijhoff, 1974, pp. 73-107.

[In this excerpt, Smith examines Origen's use of the homily and how in his hands it became an occasion for explaining the meaning of the Scriptures. Discussed as well is Origen' s theory and method of preaching. The editors have included only the footnotes that pertain to the part of the chapter devoted to Origen.]

The homily … as a speech form came into its own in the third to fifth centuries in the Byzantine church, but the idea originated centuries earlier. Aeschylus spoke of it (Thebes, 599) in the sense of intercourse with or company of people, and Jews had used it in a didactic and explanatory sense of understanding Scriptures. It remained for later and Christian writers and speakers, Clement and Origen among them, to extend its meaning to express what takes place in a meeting between a preacher and his congregation when they are studying Holy Writ.¹ It became an important vehicle not only in Clement's "Hypotyposis", and in the Alexandrian Catechetical School, but in the religious discourse of Origen himself.

In his hands it became an important means of explaining the meaning of biblical passages. Distinguished from the logos … or sermo which was more in the classical Greek sense of public discourse, the homily was conversational in tone, often lacked a central thesis, and provided a kind of running commentary—verse by verse—of a chapter. It compared one idea with another in the Bible and used allegory and other figures freely—at times too freely, by modern standards.²

The homily continued into medieval times and even into the twentieth century, but it reached its zenith in popularity and utility in the third to fifth centuries. P. Oxy 1601 and 1602, dating from this period, are but two of several examples. In each of them the speaker explains the text, then exhorts believers to be chary of Satan ("your adversary the Devil walketh about seeking to devour [you] …" 1601) and to follow Christ ("Remain [steadfast] …, receive … Christ Jesus …, accept the word … 1602).

When the modern Western reader peruses the homilies of the ancient world he is struck with two vastly different rhetorical products. On the one hand when he reads those of St. John Chrysostom of Antioch or Origen of Alexandria he is struck with solid and mature thought, with preachers whose reflective processes moved ahead of most of their contemporaries, whether secular or sacred. He finds exegesis which, while occasionally a little contrived and fanciful by modern standards, nonetheless has well stood the test of time, and can yet edify the serious reader. One would expect in an age when theological thought was much less crystallized than in the twentieth century that listeners would have greatly profited by such lectures and sermons which, like Demosthenic speeches, smelled of the lamp of diligent work.

On the other hand, the invertebrate products of preachers, like some of those of Athanasius, lacked real substance on occasion and appear today as sweet and insipid. They merit reading only as curious museum pieces. That Alexandrians could and would listen to them testifies to their superficial character and low taste.

As suggested earlier Origen (c. 184-c. 254) was the most important Alexandrian preacher utilizing the homily. This third century teacher/preacher not only commanded the highest respect of any pulpiteer, and headed the famous catechetical school (before he was 20 years old), but also constituted the transition from the traditional sermon to the homily. Modern critics have denied him a place among the ranks of great preachers,³ but near-contemporary evidence suggests the contrary. While he cannot be placed qualitively in the same rhetorical class as the Attic Ten, he had a large and celebrated following. Eusebius tells us that many and distinguished philosophers came to hear him, and Jerome opines that he was a man of incomparable eloquence and knowledge so that when he opened his mouth he dumbfounded others.⁴ A careful scholar, he cared little for Greek rhetoric as taught in the West or practiced in the sophistic schools of Alexandria and Antioch; it was too self-centered and contrived, magnifying men and manner at the expense of mind and matter. If later generations could in retrospect discern profitable features in the rhetorical training of the day, Origen's proximity to the phenomena and his religious zeal hindered his perception of such positive values. Yet, his simplicity of exposition did not prevent occasional loftiness in style nor his seeing allegorical interpretations in it, for whether by grammatico-historical, moral, or spiritual (allegorical) analysis, Scripture had much to teach one who would listen and ponder.⁵

Origen's homilies—some preserved in Greek, others in Latin translation by Rufinus and Jerome—cover both the Old and New Testaments. Of the 206 Migne published in his Patrologia Graeca we have texts of them from the Pentateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers), the historical books (Joshua, Judges, I and II Samuel), the Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel), as well as the poetic book of the Canticles. In the New Testament he wrote on Matthew, Luke, John, and some of Paul's Epistles. We do not have the original or intermediate source of many of the extant texts which have come to us from the desks of Rufinus and Jerome, but the present ones likely represent at least the substance and probably much of the style of the original homilies. Early in his preaching career he wrote out his homilies, but later in life his extemporaneous delivery called upon the wide and intensive reading of earlier years. Shorthand reporters … listening to him recorded his speeches, providing the basis for the later translations into Latin which have survived. The tautology which we sometimes find may stem from scribal errors or (more probably) from the speaker's emphasis of selected portions,⁶ as he would have learned from earlier Athenian speeches. But repetition in the texts does occur from time to time.

In his thirteen homilies on Exodus he typically begins with a proposition or statement, proceeds through verse by verse exposition and exegesis—a vague resemblance of classical narration ( … narratio)—then ends with the benediction from I Peter iv. 11, and a final "Amen."⁷ In III and (Exodus iv) on the excuse of Moses that he was not eloquent before Pharoah, Origen replies that all men on occasion lack eloquence and stand mute. God it is who must open their mouths for good causes, while Satan prompts them to buffoonery, obscenities, and useless talk. In VIII (Exodus xx) on the First Commandment of the Decalogue we predictably find him acknowledging in a polytheistic society that there are many gods to seduce the faithful from the worship of Jehovah. "To thee also who through Jesus Christ art come out of Egypt and hast been led forth from the house of bondage, it is said, 'Thou shalt have none other gods before me.'" Deliverance was not only for the ancient House of Israel, but for all men: Egypt was not only Israel's prison, but allegorically was contemporary man's as well. Jerusalem and Judea represented the houses of liberty for those leaving their former life and looking for true freedom.

Between A.D. 244 and 249 at an undetermined place Origen preached his 28 homilies on the book of Numbers in which he depicted the journey of the ancient Jews as a type of the spiritual Odyssey of the Christian.⁸ In XX (Numbers, xxv), a comparatively long homily taking perhaps a half-hour in delivery, he begins with a prefatory statement recounting the historical seduction of Israel by Moab, then shows the moral sense that luxury can lead to sin. Yet if one arms himself (following Paul in Ephesians vi. 14-17) he will withstand the moral battle and finally be united with God. Should he choose otherwise his destiny lies with Satan; there is no middle ground. This speech, like many that he gave, shows the typical three interpretations he normally found in Scripture: grammatico-historical, moral, and spiritual. In XII (Numbers xxi. 16) the three are not quite so clear, but we see at least two when he holds that while the Israelites had a literal well Christians have a spiritual one, the Word of God, which brings refreshment from Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

But sometimes he carried his allegories too far, as in XXVII of the Numbers collection. In speaking of the Israelites camping at Thara (Terah; Numbers xxxii. 26-27) he understood Thara to mean a mental stupor (contemplatio stuporis) into which one might fall because of some great thing (alicuius magnae rei) happening to him. But reading the biblical text itself does not support this interpretation. The city was simply one of several places where the Israelites camped. Either he had access to data not mentioned in the original account or he read into the verse what he wished to find. At any rate, the allegory strains the narrative.

The twenty-six Joshua homilies came near the end of Origen's preaching career (A.D. 249-50) and while they probably were preached not in Alexandria, but in Caesarea, they merit passing mention because of the speaker himself.⁹ He sees many adumbrations for the contemporary Christian: at the Jordan River the Kingdom for the Christian begins and a new conqueror rules; Jericho is the city of evil which falls under the onslaught of the Word of God and the Apostle's doctrines; Rahab prefigures the Gentiles who hear the Good News and believe; and the Canaanites are the demonic powers which war against the soul. Homily II (Joshua i. 2) shows not simply the death of Moses and the rising of Joshua, but for contemporary men, the death of the Mosaic Law and the new regime of the Gentiles. Jesus (Joshua; the Hebrew language does not distinguish the two) has supplanted Moses.¹⁰ When one sees, the preacher went on in era of persecution, that Jesus Christ has been crucified, the church grows 30-60-100-fold. When he sees the gathering together of the saints, and the people of God observing the Sabbath, not by abstaining from ordinary affairs (con versatione communi), but from acts of sin—when this and more comes about—then know that Jesus, Son of God, holds the leadership.

Luke appears to have been a favorite book of Origen, if we can judge by the thirty-nine homilies devoted to it.¹¹ They date from A.D. 233-34, but as with most of the other rhetorical works, we find few hints of the occasion. Some of them, III, IX, XV, and XXIV could not have consumed more than 3-5 minutes, if our texts approach completeness. And those numbered XIV, XXI, XXII, and XXIV were probably directed to his catechumens, for he treats explicitly baptism as a necessary preparation for receiving the sacrament of the Lord's Table, while XVIII (Luke ii. 40-49) depicts Jesus' parents searching for him at the age of twelve and finding him "not simply in the temple, but sitting in the midst of the doctors." Origen probably had his young students in mind when he said, "Y[ou], therefore, seek Him in the temple of God; seek Him in the Church; seek Him among the teachers who are in the temple, and who depart not from it. If you so seek Him, you will find Him." And in XXXIII in veiled language he invites his listeners to follow the example of Naaman the leper to be cleansed by washing in the Jordan (baptism) and become clean.

Origen's method of preaching was basically a verse by verse exegesis and exposition of Scripture, and probably every verse of every chapter of a selected book. However, in the Lukan homilies which Jerome has preserved for us the first 33 cover for the most part the initial five chapters of the book (chiefly i.l - iv. 27), but the final six treat only five of the remaining 20 chapters. In view of his normally thorough and systematic approach to his topic, he very likely examined the other chapters as well, but those works have not survived. Because of these qualities his expository homilies far outnumber those of a hortatory nature, and thus they have been copied and recopied until today they constitute an important part of the Origean corpus.

At the close of all 39 he prefaces the last statement in each with some phrase referring to Jesus and then concludes with the brief benediction from I Peter iv.11, "to whom belong the glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen." (cui est gloria et imperium in saecula saeculorum. Amen). The same conclusion occurs in those of Exodus and Numbers as well, suggesting both a (now) conventionalized liturgical form as well as a basic desire to glorify his Lord. In the Lukan homilies, unlike in his others, there is little introduction, and never any attempt to capture effectively the attention of the audience. He seldom includes a final summary or call to action; this he seems to accomplish in the benediction. While one can theorize that the expositions were intended for a small coterie of disciples and hence no such effort was needed, the supposition remains that they were seemingly composed for the community at large. Probably he was simply following (or entrenching) the custom of making no initial adaptation to either audience or occasion.

Yet Origen concerned himself with his immediate audience, this is abundantly clear. In the first place, he spoke in Greek, not in the native Egyptian tongue of the chora and found in parts of the city. He did so because, as a Hellenistic scholar, he was not only raised in a Greek-speaking family, but was Greek in virtually everything but religion. He therefore spoke to those he most wished to reach. This means that few Egyptians would have found their way into either his classroom or his congregation. It is possible, of course, that he employed interpreters, much as Scythopolis used Procopius in Palestine to interpret into Aramaic,¹² and as the Alexandrian courts came to do for native Egyptians, but not only have we no evidence to support such a theory for his speaking but it is highly unlikely.

Then too we note his overriding concern with the here and now much in keeping with the general disposition of the Alexandrians.¹³ While this strikes one as odd in view of his own disciplined study and mastery of earlier works, it shows that he simply accommodated himself to the realities of the speaking situation. One finds little in his preaching to urge his listeners to search out the truth by study and reflection. He often spoke briefly though sometimes his analysis would extend to a half-hour (as in his treatment of I Samuel i & ii). The homilies rather play on the restlessness of his listeners and their preoccupation with the present. He was, in a word, relevant.

Since one purpose of the Origean homilies was to teach biblical content and explain Scripture, the speaker drew heavily—almost exclusively—from other parts of the Bible. In his second homily on Canticles (i. 12b-ii. 14) he cites the Scriptures 77 times: 35 from the Old Testament (eight from the Psalms) and 42 from the New (Matthew, 16 times). And in his lengthy exposition of I Samuel i and ii he alludes to the Old Testament 83 times (of which 43 come from the books of Kings) and 70 times to the New (of which Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians are cited 25 times). In XIV (Luke) he quotes or refers to Paul's writings nine times from a total of 16 references to the New Testament. This high regard for Paul probably stems from the latter's perception of many allegories and types in the Old Testament, an insight which particularly pleased Origen who also felt that the Scriptures had more to offer than mere history. So Origen's keen memory, thorough grasp of sacred writing, love of allegory (especially found in Paul), and intellectual acumen served him and his audiences well.

Origen's theory of preaching was basically simple. As previously suggested, to him Scripture had three meanings: the grammatico-historical (which established the context), the moral (which applied the verse to the present day) and the spiritual or allegorical (which lifted one to higher heights). He believed that the preacher must know both the Scriptures and the hearts of men, and that he must become as a child to other children, much as God became a child in Jesus, in order to win them for the Kingdom. Thus Origen sought to preach plainly, directly, and often briefly,¹⁴ to allow maximum understanding. One finds in him a "subdued fire that reveals the tale of mental suffering and exhausting toil. Hence that austere solemnity, that absolute sincerity, that breadth and dignity of mind, which grasp and detain the reader with the same spell that was cast upon Gregory."¹⁵ But in arresting his audience he did so not by reference to his own personal experiences or even to those of others around him but by the internal and inherent power of the ideas he developed. If Gregory of Nyssa saw the allegorical interpretation as merely one of several techniques useful to the preacher, Origen conceived of it as the very basis for his preaching.¹⁶ Listeners were intellectually challenged, morally exhorted, and and spiritually uplifted with this type of preaching, though twentieth century congregations, accustomed to the Greek sermo, would find much of it inadequate.

While Origen made no initial efforts to adapt to his audience, various clues in his sermons suggest that he either tried to recapture waning attention of his listeners, once he had begun, or his amanuenses took more than normal care in their shorthand accounts. In Homily VI (Luke) he says that God has given to this our gathering and assembly (huic coetui nostro atque conventui) a share of His power, while in VIII (Exodus) he declares that Scripture itself, "if you will listen with attention and patience [si intente et patiente auditis], will be able to instruct us."¹⁷ Elsewhere on the Canticles he exhorts, "you members of the church, speak to the daughters of Jerusalem" [Et tu, ecclesiastice, ad filias Hierusalem converte sermonem].¹⁸ One might construe such statements as general exhortations to anyone reading Scripture or worshipping, nonetheless they may have obliquely called back the audience's ebbing attention to the issues at hand. In any event, one must look closely for such adaptation; it is not nearly so obvious as in the more classically oriented sermons summarized in the Acts of the Apostles.

We see another side of Origen's rhetorical ability. In the minutes of a recently discovered work, A Conversation of Origen with Heracleides, which highlights the trial of Bishop Heracleides probably between A.D. 244 and 249 and perhaps in the bishop's own Alexandrian church,¹⁹ the defendant's orthodoxy had been called into question. Origen, experienced in theological issues and the one under whose preaching Heracleides was converted, was asked to take an active role in the examination of the prelate. The dialogue centered around the beliefs of Heracleides with specific questions like, if Jesus Christ was God, did He really die on the cross? Or, what is the nature of the soul? The account of the trial—some of it is verbatim, as shown by the quotations following the frequent use of "——(name) said … —shows Origen in command of the situation at every point. He questions, makes short speeches on theological points such as the essence of the soul, and, as in the homilies, copiously supports his statements with Scriptural references. His sifting and challenging forces the bishop, not his match, to admit two gods in the Christian faith. But Origen's monotheism would not let him rest with that. Quickly drawing the analogy of Adam and Eve becoming one flesh, though not one spirit or soul, and of the righteous man as wedded with Christ, yet distinct from Him, he sought to draw the parallel in the Trinity. But his analogies broke down, and each side was left with two gods, however objectionable it seemed to Christian doctrine.

The audience at the Heracleides trial seems to have drawn both clergy and laymen—perhaps even some non-Christian laymen, for Origen feared he was casting his pearls before swine (xii. 22ff and xv. 7ff). Additional evidence for this stems from the fact that after he was queried on the nature of the soul he hesitated to answer because he feared he might confuse the uninstructed laymen present. The altercation, though confusing to the untutored, must have been charged with excitement and feeling as this highly gifted theologian sought to frame the acceptability of, or their opposites to, specific doctrines.

We do not know the outcome of the trial, whether or not the bishop was acquitted of heresy, but we do see Origen as an advocate thoroughly schooled in his subject, gentle, but with questions which lead to problematic answers. In the courtroom or the classroom he was considerate, kind, and erudite.

Origen's heart and mind moved too rapidly for the church in Alexandria. Demetrius, the local bishop, not only banished him for certain irregular beliefs regarding the Trinity and for his unorthodox ordination in Jerusalem (when Origen was in exile), but even had him excommunicated on grounds curious by some twentieth century theological standards. As Neale points out, in an age when doctrine was not clearly settled, Origen mixed what today would be called heresy with orthodoxy concerning the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. When he and others were hammering out beliefs on the anvil of experience and reflection it was difficult to keep paradoxical matters in nice balance.²⁰

Notes

1. Dargan, History of Preaching, I, 49. Clement also preached, but his public sermons have not come down to us—unlike the literary product of his namesake of Rome with whom the former is often confused. We shall return to Clement of Alexandria in the next chapter when discussing education.
2. William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature (University of Chicago, 1957), v.… ; G.W.H. Lampe, Patristic Greek Lexicon (Oxford, 1961), v.… ; (no editor), New Catholic Encyclopedia (New York, 1967), VII, v. "homily;" and James Hastings (ed.), Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, X (New York, 1955), v. "Preaching."
3. John Ker, Lectures on the History of Preaching, 2nd ed. (London, 1888), p. 63, Edwin C. Dargan, History of Preaching, I, 54, and Matter, Histoire de L'École d'Alexandrie, III, 85.
4. … H.E., VI. xviii. 1 ff. Conceivably this statement could refer to Origen's teaching in the School. Jerome, Epistles, xxxiii. 4: sed quia gloriam eloquentiae ejus, et scientiae ferre non poterant, et illo dicente, omnes multi putabantur.
5. Dargan, History of Preaching, I, 51. Origen was not, of course, the first preacher to treat Scripture allegorically. Not only had Philo two centuries before done so, but even the pagan Egyptian priests in the Book of the Dead in the second millenium B.C. so treated it. Broadus, Lectures on the History of Preaching, p. 54, and R[ichard] B. Tollington, Selections from the Commentaries and Homilies of Origen (London, 1929), p. xxxv.
6. Origen disclaimed any flourishes of style, or perhaps simply lacked the ability. His homilies are at once clear, simple, plain in style, and sometimes dull. His father, Leonides, was probably a rhetorician, though one does not find in the son's works the attention to style he would expect in the era of the Second Sophistic. Philip Schaff, "Ante-Nicene Christianity," History of the Christian Church (New York, 1901), II, 786-88, and Paniel, Pragmatische Geschichte der Christlichen Beredsamkeit, pp. 175-79.
7. In considering the Exodus homilies I have used chiefly P. Fortier and H. de Lubac, "Origène: Homélies sur L'Exode," Sources Chrétiennes, 16 (Paris, 1947).
8. For the discussion of the Numbers homilies I have used André Méhat, "Origène: Homélies sur les Nombres," Sources Chrétiennes, 29 (Paris, 1951).
9. I have used Annie Jaubert, "Origène: Homélies sur Josué," Sources Chrétiennes, 71 (Paris, 1960), for the discussion of the Joshua homilies.
10. Iesus post Moysen suscepit et obtinuit principatum. Rufinus translation.
11. In discussing the Lukan homilies I have used Max Rauer, "Homilien zu Luka" in Origenes Werke, IX (Berlin, 1959), M.F. Toal, trans., Sunday Sermons of the Great Fathers (Chicago, 1957), I, and Henri Crouzel, François Fournier, and Pierre Perichon, "Origène: Homélies sur S. Luc," Sources Chrétiennes, 87 (Paris, 1962).
12. Fergus Millar, "Paul of Samosata, Zenobia and Aurelian: The Church, Local Culture and Political Allegiance in Third-Century Syria," Journal of Roman Studies, LXI (1971), 7.
13. "L'exégèse d'Origène est donc orientée par les préoccupations fondamentales du moment." Jaubert, "Origène," p. 13.
14. Eusebius, H.E., VI, xxxvi, Bingham, Antiquities of the Christian Church, II, 717, Paniel, Pragmatische Geschichte der Christlichen Beredsamkeit, pp. 175-83, and Dargan, History of Preaching, I, 52.
15. Bigg, Church's Task under the Roman Empire, p. 168.
16. C.W. Macleod, "Allegory and Mysticism in Origen and Gregory of Nyssa," Journal of Theological Studies, N.S. XXII (1972), 371.
17. Conceivably this could refer to their reading and heeding habits.
18. So Jerome.
19. The largely complete Greek text (based on P Cairo Inv 88745) with French translation was first published by Jean Scherer (1949) and may be found in his "Entretien d'Origène avec Héraclide" (Paris, 1960), Sources Chrétiennes 77. An English translation is available in John E.L. Oulton and Henry Chadwick, "Alexandrian Christianity," Library of Christian Classics (Philadelphia, 1954), II, 430 ff.
20. Neale, "Patriarchate of Alexandria," pp. 28-35.