Origen of Alexandria, On First Principles 10
Our discussion has already turned to the coming judgment and the repayment and punishments for sins, exactly as the holy scriptures threaten and the church's preaching teaches. We are told that at the moment of judgment 'eternal fire' and 'outer darkness,' 'prison' and 'furnace,' and other such things have been prepared for sinners, so we should consider what we ought to think about these realities. To approach them in proper order, it seems right to take up the question of the resurrection first, so that we can understand what it is that will come either to punishment or to rest and blessedness. I have treated this more fully in other books written on the resurrection, showing what appeared to me on the subject; yet because of the present treatise's sequence it is not out of place to repeat a few points here. This is especially necessary because some take offense at the church's faith, claiming we believe in the resurrection foolishly and with complete lack of sense — particularly heretics, to whom I think we must answer as follows.
If they admit that there is a resurrection of the dead, let them tell us: what is it that has died, if not the body? The resurrection of the body will therefore take place. Then let them say whether they think we are to make use of bodies or not. When the apostle Paul declares that 'the body is sown as an animal body, it will rise as a spiritual body' (1 Cor 15:42-44), I do not see how they can deny that the body rises or that we shall use bodies in the resurrection. Now, if it is certain that we must use bodies, and the bodies that have fallen are said to 'rise' — for nothing properly 'rises' except what has previously fallen — then there is no doubt that these bodies rise precisely so that we may be clothed with them again after the resurrection. One point follows from another: if bodies rise, they rise without doubt to serve as our clothing; and if it is necessary for us to be in bodies (as it certainly is), we ought not to be in any bodies other than our own. If it is true that bodies rise and that spirits rise, there can be no doubt that they are said to rise from the dead after casting off corruption and laying aside mortality; otherwise rising from the dead would appear vain and superfluous, only to die again. This becomes clearer when someone carefully considers the quality of the animal body which, once sown in the earth, will produce the quality of a spiritual body. For from the animal body itself, the power of the resurrection and the grace of the spiritual body bring forth that spiritual body, when it is transformed from lowliness to glory (1 Cor 15:42-44).
Since the heretics consider themselves extremely learned and wise, we will question them: does every body have some shape — that is, is it formed by some habit? If they say there is a body not formed by any habit, they will show themselves the most unlearned and foolish of all; no one would deny this unless completely alien to all learning. But if, following the logical consequence, they admit that every body is indeed formed by some definite habit, we will ask them to demonstrate and describe the habit of the spiritual body — which they certainly cannot do. We will also ask about the differences among those who rise. How will they prove true the statement that 'one is the flesh of birds, another of fish; and there are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies; but one is the glory of the heavenly bodies, another of the earthly bodies; one is the glory of the sun, another of the moon, another of the stars, for star differs from star in glory; so also is the resurrection of the dead'? Following that logic, let them show us the differences of glory among the heavenly bodies of those who rise. If they attempt in any way to devise an explanation based on the differences of heavenly bodies, we will then ask them to assign the differences of the resurrection also by comparison with earthly bodies. We, however, understand it this way: the apostle, wishing to describe how great the difference is among those who will rise 'in glory' — that is, the saints — took a comparison from heavenly bodies, saying: 'One is the glory of the sun, another of the moon, another of the stars.' And again, wishing to teach the differences of those who in this life have not been purified and will come to the resurrection — that is, sinners — he takes an example from earthly things, saying: 'One is the flesh of birds, another of fish.' For it is fitting that heavenly things are compared to the saints, and earthly things to sinners. These points have been made against those who deny the resurrection of the dead, that is, the resurrection of bodies.
Now we turn our discussion to some of our own people who, either from narrowness of understanding or poverty of explanation, introduce a very base and degraded sense of the resurrection of the body. We ask them: how do they understand the animal body to be changed by the grace of the resurrection and to become spiritual? How do they think that what is sown 'in weakness' will rise 'in power,' and what is sown 'in lowliness' will rise 'in glory'? And how will what is sown 'in corruption' be transferred to 'incorruption'? If they believe the apostle that the body rising 'in glory and in power and in incorruption' has already been made spiritual (1 Cor 15:42-44), it seems absurd and contrary to the apostle's meaning to say that it is again entangled in the passions of 'flesh and blood,' when the apostle clearly says: 'For flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God, nor can corruption possess incorruption' (1 Cor 15:50). How, too, do they accept what the apostle says, that 'we will all be changed'? That change, according to the order we mentioned above, is to be expected, and in it we rightly hope for something worthy of divine grace — something we believe will come to pass in this order: just as the apostle describes when 'a naked grain of wheat or some other seed' is sown in the earth, to which 'God gives a body as he wills,' after the grain itself has first died. So also our bodies are to be thought of as falling to the earth like a grain; in them a principle is implanted that contains the bodily substance, and although the bodies have died and been corrupted and scattered, the word of God — that same principle, always preserved in the substance of the body — raises them from the earth and restores and repairs them, just as the power within the grain of wheat, after its corruption and death, repairs and restores the grain into the body of the stalk and the ear. And so, for those who will deserve to inherit the heavenly kingdom, that principle of repairing the body, which we spoke of above, by God's command repairs the 'spiritual body' from the earthly and animal body, so that it can dwell in the heavens; but for those of lower merit, or more base, or even the lowest and most hidden, the glory and dignity of the body will be given according to the dignity of each one's life and soul — yet in such a way that even for those destined for 'eternal fire' or 'punishments,' through the very transformation of the resurrection the body that rises is incorrupt, so that it cannot be corrupted or dissolved even by punishments.
If, therefore, the quality of the body that rises from the dead is such, let us now see what the threat of 'eternal fire' means. For we find in the prophet Isaiah that the 'fire' by which each one is punished is designated as their own; he says: 'Walk in the light of your fire and in the flame that you have kindled for yourselves' (Isa 50:11). Through these words it seems to be indicated that each sinner kindles his own 'flame' of his own 'fire,' and does not sink into some fire previously kindled by another or already standing before him. The fuel and material of this fire are our sins, which the apostle Paul calls 'wood and hay and stubble.' I think that just as in the body an abundance and quality or quantity of food contrary to health generates fevers, and fevers of different kinds or durations according to the measure in which the imbalance has collected the material and supplied fuel for the fevers (the quality of that material, gathered from diverse imbalance, being the cause of a more bitter or longer disease): so also the soul, when it has gathered a multitude of evil works and an abundance of sins in itself, at the fitting time all that congregation of evils boils over into punishment and is inflamed into penalties; since also the mind itself or conscience, through divine power, receiving all things into memory — of which it impressed certain signs and forms on itself when it sinned — will see a certain history of its own crimes, whether foully or shamefully committed or even impiously done, laid out before its eyes. Then the conscience itself is stirred and pricked by its own goads and becomes its own accuser and witness. I think the apostle Paul understood this when he says: 'For they will accuse or even defend one another in their thoughts on the day when God will judge the hidden things of men according to my gospel through Jesus Christ' (Rom 2:16). From this it is understood that certain torments are generated around the very substance of the soul from the harmful affections of sins.
Latin
Sed quoniam nos sermo commonuit de iudicio futuro et de retributione ac suppliciis peecatorum, secundum quod comminantur sanctae scripturae et ecclesiastica praedicatio continet, eo quod iudiei tempore ‘ignis aeternus- et -tenebrae exteriores- et “carcer- et -caminus- et alia his similia peccatoribus praeparata sint, videamus quid etiam de his sentiri. oporteat, Sed ut ad haec competenti ordine veniatur, prius mihi videtur de resurrectione sermo movendus, ut sciamus quid est illud quod vel ad supplieium vel ad requiem ac beatitudinem veniet; de quo et in aliis quidem libris, quos de resurrectione scripsimus, plenius disputavimus et quid nobis de hoc videretur ostendimus. Sed et nune propter consequentiam tractatus pauca inde repetere non videtur absurdum, maxime propter hoe quod offenduntur quidam in ecclesiastica fide, quod velut stulte et penitus insipienter de resurrectione credamus, praecipue haeretici, quibus hoc modo arbitror respondendum. Si confitentur etiam ipsi quia resurrectio sit mortuorum, respondeant nobis: quid est quod mortuum est, nonne corpus? Corporis ergo resurrectio fiet. Tum deinde dicant si utendum putant nobis esse corporibus aut non? Arbitror apostolo Paulo dicente quia “seminatur corpus animale, resurget corpus spiritale”, istos negare non posse quod ‘corpus resurgat vel quia in resurrectione corporibus utamur. Quid ergo? Si certum est quia corporibus nobis utendum sit, et ‘corpora’ ea, quae ceciderunt, ‘resurgere’ praedicantur (non enim proprie resurgere dicitur nisi id, quod ante ceciderit), null dubium est idcirco ea ‘resurgeres, ut his iterum ex resurrectione induamur. Alterum ergo haeret ex altero. Nam et si resurgunt corpora, sine dubio ad indumentum nostri resurgunt, et si necesse est nos esse in corporibus (sieut certe necesse est), non in alüs quam in nostris corporibus esse debemus. Quae si verum est quod resurgunt et :spiritaha- resurgunt, dubium non est quin abiecta corruptione et deposita mortalitate resurgere dicantur a mortuis; ahoquin vanum videbitur et superfluum resurgere quem a mortuis, ut iterum moriatur. Quod ita demum intellegi evidentius potest, si qui diligenter advertat, quae sit -animalis corporis- qualitas, quae in terram seminata ‘spiritalis corporis. reparet qualitatem. Ex -animali- namque “corpore- ipsa virtus resurrectionis et gratia ‘spiritale corpus’ educit, cum id ab -indigmitate- transmutat ad ‘gloriam”. 2. Quoniam ergo haeretici eruditissimi sibi videntur et sapientissimi, interrogabimus eos, si omne corpus schema aliquod habet, id est aliquo habitu deformetur. Et si quidem dixerint esse corpus quod non aliquo habitu deformetur, imperitissimi omnium atque insipientissimi videbuntur. Nullus enim hoc negabit, nisi sit ab omni eruditione penitus alienus. Si vero secundum id, quod consequens est, dixerint quia omne corpus certo quo habitu deformatur, requiremus ab eis, si possunt nobis ‘spiritalis corporis’ habitum demonstrare atque deseribere; quod utique facere nullo modo poterunt. Sed et differentias eorum, qui resurgunt, inquiremus ab eis. Quomodo ostendent verum esse illud, quod dietum est quia “ala caro volucrum, alia piscium; et corpora caelestia et corpora terrestria; sed alia quidem caelestium gloria, alia vero terrestrium, alia gloria solis, alia gloria lunae, alia gloria stellarum, stella enim ab stella differt in gloria; ita et resurrectio mortuorum”? Secundum istam ergo consequentiam caelestium corporum ostendant nobis differentias gloriae eorum qui resurgunt, et si ullo genere conati fuerint secundum caelestium corporum differentias aliquam excogitare rationem, quaeremus ab eis, ut etiam secundum terrenorum corporum comparationem differentias resurreetionis adsignent. Nos vero ita intellegimus, quod volens apostolus describere, quanta esset differentia eorum, qui resurgent “in gloria, id est sanctorum, comparationem caelestium corporum sumpsit dicens: “Alia gloria solis, alia gloria lunae, alia gloria stellarume. Et iterum volens differentias eorum docere, qui in hae vita non expurgati ad resurrectionem venient, id est peccatores, de terrenis sumit exemplum dicens: “Alia caro volucrum, alia piscium”. Digne etenim sanctis caelestia, terrena peccatoribus comparantur. Haee quidem dicta sint adversum eos, qui “resurrectionem mortuorume, id est resurrectionem corporum negant. 3. Nune vero sermonem convertimus ad nonnullos nostrorum, qui vel pro intelleetus exiguitate vel explanationis inopia valde vilem et abiectum sensum de resurrectione corporis introducunt. (Quos interrogamus, quomodo intellegant ‘animale corpus- gratia resurrectionis immutandum et “spiritale- futurum, et quomodo quod ‘in infirmitate seminatur-. resurrecturum sentiant ‘in virtutes, et quod ‘in ignobilitate-, quomodo -resurgat in gloria; et quod ‘in eorruptione., quomodo ad “neorruptionem- transferatur. Quod utique si credunt apostolo quia corpus ‘in gloria et in virtute et in incorruptibilitate- resurgens, ‘spiritale” iam effectum sit, absurdum videtur et contra apostoli sensum dicere, id rursum ‘carnis et sanguinis- passionibus implicari, cum manifeste dieat apostolus: “Quoniam caro et sanguis regnum dei non possidebunt, neque corruptio incorruptionem possidebit”, Sed et illud quomodo aecipiunt, quod dicit apostolus quia “omnes autem immutabimur”? Quae utique immutatio secundum illum ordinem, quem superius diximus, expectanda est, in qua sine dubio dignum aliquid divina gratia sperare nos convenit; quod futurum credimus hoc ordine quo “nudum granum frumenti aut alicuius ceterorum” in terra seminatum describit apostolus, eui “deus dat corpus prout voluit”, cum prius "granum- ipsum “frumenti- -mortuum fuerit. Ita namque etiam nostra corpora velut “granum- cadere in terram putanda sunt; quibus insita ratio ea, quae substantiam continet corporalem, quamvis emortua fuerint corpora et corrupta atque dispersa, verbo tamen dei ratio illa ipsa, quae semper in substantia corporis salva est, erigat ea de terra et restituat ac reparet, sicut ea virtus, quae inest in grano frumenti, post corruptionem eius ac mortem reparat ac restituit granum in culmi corpus et spicae.- Et ita his quidem, qui regni eaelorum hereditatem consequi merebuntur, ratio illa reparandi corporis, quam supra diximus, dei iussu ex terreno et ‘animali corpore- “corpus- reparat ‘spiritale”, quod habitare possit in caelis; his vero, qui inferioris meriti fuerint vel abiectioris aut etiam ultimi et abstrusi, pro uniuscuiusque vitae atque animae dignitate etiam gloria corporis et dignitas dabitur: ita tamen ut etiam eorum, qui ad ‘ignem aeternum- vel ad ‘supplieia” destinandi sunt, per ipsam resurrectionis permutationem ita corpus incorruptum sit quod resurgit, ut ne suppliciis quidem corrumpi valeat ae dissolvi. 4. Si ergo ita se habet qualitas eius corporis, quod resurget a mortuis, videamus nunc quid sibi velit ‘ignis aeterni- comminatio. 4. Invenimus namque in Esaia propheta designari uniuscuiusque proprium esse ‘ignem’ quo punitur; ait enim: “Ambulate in lumine ignis vestri et in flamma, quam accendistis vobismet ipsis”. Per quos sermones hoc videtur indicari, quod unusquisque peccatorum “flammam-” sibi ipse proprii ‘ignis’ ‘accendat”, et non in aliquem ignem, qui antea lam fuerit accensus ab alio vel ante ipsum substiterit, demergatur. Cuius ignis esca atque materia sunt nostra peccata, quae ab apostolo Paulo ‘ligna et faenum et stipula- nominantur. Et arbitror quod sicut in corpore escae abundantia et qualitas vel quantitas cibi contraria febres generat, et febres diversi vel modi vel temporis secundum eam mensuram, qua intemperies collecta materiam suggesserit ac fomitem febrium (quae materiae qualitas, ex diversa intemperie congregata, causa vel acerbioris morbi vel prolixioris existit): ita anima cum multitudinem malorum operum et abundantiam in se congregaverit peccatorum, conpetenti tempore omnis illa malorum congregatio effervescit ad supplicium atque inflammatur ad poenas; cum etiam mens ipsa vel conscientia per divinam virtutem omnia in memorlam recipiens, quorum in semet signa quaedam ac formas, cum peccaret, expresserat, et singulorum, quae vel foede ac turpiter gesserat vel etiam impie commiserat, historiam quandam scelerum suorum ante oculos videbit expositam: tunc et ipsa conscientia propriis stimulis agitatur atque conpungitur et sui ipsa efficitur accusatrix et testis. Quod ita sensisse etiam Paulum apostolum puto cum dicit: “Inter se invicem cogitationibus aceusantibus aut etiam defendentibus in die, quo iudicabit deus oceulta hominum secundum evangelium meum per lesum Christum”. Ex quo intellegitur quod cirea ipsam animae substantiam tormenta quaedam ex ipsis peecatorum noxiis affectibus generantur.