Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

In the view of Origen the x as such, which he derives from úx, holds the medium between body and spirit. He affirms to have met with no passage in the Sacred Scriptures, in which the soul, as such, is favourably spoken of, while, on the contrary, it is frequently condemned, de princ. ii. 8. 3-5. Opp. i. p. 95, ss. (Redep. p. 211, ss.) But this does not prevent him from comparing the soul to the Son, when he draws a comparison between the human and the Divine trias, ibid. § 5.For the trichotomistic division, comp. also Comment. in Matth, T. xiii. 2. Opp. iii. p. 570, and other passages in Münscher ed. by von Cölln, i. p. 319, 320. Origen sometimes employs the simple term "man" to designate his higher spiritual nature, so that man appears not so much to consist of body and soul, as to be the soul itself which governs the body as a mere instrument, contra Cels. vii. 38 : "Ανθρωπος, τουτέστι ψυχὴ χρωμένη σώματι (comp. Photius Cod. 234. Epiph. hær. 64. 17.) Consequently he calls the soul homo homo homo interior, in Num. xxiv. comp. Thomasius, 1. c.

=

(4) De anima c. 10, 11, 20, 21, 22: Anima dei flatu nata, immortalis, corporalis, effigiata, substantia simplex, de suo patiens varie procedens, libera arbitrii, accidentiis obnoxia, per ingenia mutabilis, rationalis, dominatrix, divinatrix, ea una redundans. adv. Hermog. c. 11. and Neander, Antignosticus, p. 457. Concerning the importance which, from his practical position, he attached to the senses (the key to his theological opinions) comp. ibid. p. 452, ss.

(5) Iren. i. 5. 5. comp. also Neander's gnostische Systeme, p. 127, ss. Baur, Gnosis, 158, ss., 168, ss., 489, ss., 679, ss. Münscher, edit. by von Cölln, p. 316. 17.

§ 55.

ORIGIN OF THE SOUL.

The inquiry into the origin of the human soul, and the mode of its union to the body, seems to belong solely to metaphysics, and to have no bearing whatever upon religion.(1) But, in a religious point of view, it is always of importance, that the soul should be considered as a being which has derived its existence from God. This doctrine

was maintained by the catholic church in opposition to the Gnostic theory of emanations, (2) to which the opinion of Origen concerning the pre-existence of the soul is closely allied.(*) On the contrary, Tertullian asserted the propagation of the soul per traducem in accordance with his realistico-material conceptions of its corporeity, (Traducianism.)(4)

(1) Accordingly Origen says de princ. proœm. 5. Opp. i. p. 48: De anima vero utrum ex seminis traduce ducatur, ita ut ratio ipsius vel substantia inserta ipsis seminibus corporalibus habeatur, an vero aliud habeat initium, et hoc ipsum initium si genitum est aut non genitum, vel certe si extrinsecus corpori inditur, necne: non satis manifesta prædicatione distinguitur.

Traces of the theory of emanation are found in the writings of some of the earlier Fathers. Justin M., fragm. de resurr. 11: Η μὲν ψυχή ἐστιν ἄφθαρτος, μέρος οὖσα τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐμφύσημα. Comp. the Clementine Homilies, Hom. xvi. 12. On the other hand, Clement of Alex. adheres to the idea of a created being, Coh. p. 78: Μόνος ὁ τῶν ὅλων δημιουργὸς ὁ ἀριστοτέχνας πατὴς τοιοῦτον ἄγαλμα ἔμψυχον ἡμᾶς, τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἔπλασεν, and Strom. ii. 16, p. 467, 468, where he rejects the phrase Migos Oso, which some have employed, in accordance with the principle: Θεὸς οὐδεμίαν ἔχει πρὸς ἡμᾶς Quarzy. Comp. Orig. in Joh. T. xiii. 25. Opp. T. iv. p. 235 : Σρόδρα ἐστὶν ἀσεβες ὁμοούσιον τῇ ἀγεννήτῳ φύσει καὶ παμμακαρία εἶναι λέγειν τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας ἐν πνεύματι τῷ Θεῷ. Comp. de princ. i. 7. 1. (3) Clemens, Coh. p. 6 : Πρὸ δὲ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου καταβολῆς ἡμεῖς οἱ τῷ δεῖν ἔσεσθαι ἐν αὐτῷ πρότερον γεγεννημένοι τῷ Θεῷ· τοῦ Θεοῦ λόγου τὰ λογικὰ πλάσματα ἡμεῖς· δι' ὃν ἀρχαΐζομεν, ὅτι ἐν ἀρχῇ ὁ λόγος ἦν; this perhaps should rather be understood in an ideal sense. But Origen, following the example of the Pythagoræan and Platonic schools as well as of the later Jewish theology, speaks of the pre-existence of the soul as something real (Comp. Epiph. hær. 64, 4: Tùv Luxǹv γὰρ τὴν ἀνθρωπείαν λέγει προϋπάρχειν.) He reconciles his doctrine with human liberty and Divine justice by maintaining that the soul entering into the bodies of men suffers punishment for former sins. Comp. de princ. i. 7, 4. Opp. i. p. 72. (Redep. p. 151. Schnitzer, p. 72.)—“ If the origin of the human soul were coeval with that of the body, how could it happen that Jacob supplanted his brother in the womb, and John leaped in the

[ocr errors]

womb at the salutation of Mary?" etc. Comp. also T. xv. in Matth. c. 34, 35, in Matth. xx. 6, 7. Opp. T. iii. p. 703, and Comment. in Joh. T. ii. 25. Opp. iv. p. 85.

(*) De anima, c. 19: Et si ad arbores provocamur, amplectemur exemplum. Si quidem et illis, necdum arbusculis, sed stipitibus adhuc et surculis etiam nunc, simul de scrobibus oriuntur, inest propria vis animæ. . . . .

quo magis hominis? cujus anima, velut surculus quidam ex matrice Adam in propaginem deducta et genitalibus feminæ foveis commendata cum omni sua paratura, pullulabit tam intellectu quam sensu? Mentior, si non statim infans ut vitam vagitu salutavit, hoc ipsum se testatur sensisse atque intellexisse, quod natus est, omnes simul ibidem dedicans sensus, et luce visum et sono auditum et humore gustum et aëre odoratum et terra tactum. Ita prima illa vox de primis sensuum et de primis intellectuum pulsibus cogitur. . . . . . Et hic itaque concludimus, omnia naturalia animæ, ut substantiva ejus, ipsi inesse et cum ipsa procedere atque proficere, ex quo ipsa censetur, sicut et Seneca sæpe noster (de benef. iv. 6): Insita sunt nobis omnium artium et ætatum semina, etc. Comp. c. 27. Neander, Antignost. p. 455.

§ 56.

THE IMAGE OF GOD.

Both the excellencies of the body, and the higher moral and religious nature of man, which were frequently pointed out by the Fathers, (1) are beautifully and appropriately described in the simple words of Scripture (Gen. i. 27.) "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him." This expression continued to be employed by the church.(2) But it was

a point of no little difficulty precisely to determine in what the image of God consists. As body and soul could not absolutely be separated, the notion arose that even the body of man is created after the image of God, (3) and this was held by some in a more literal, by others in a more figurative sense, while some again rejected it altogether. All parties, however, adınitted as a matter of course, that

the image of God has a special reference to the spiritual faculties of man. But, inasmuch as there is a great difference between the mere natural dispositions, and their developement by the free use of the powers which have been granted to men, several writers, among whom Irenæus, and especially Clement and Origen, distinguished between the image of God, and resemblance to God. The latter can only be obtained by a mental conflict (in an ethical point of view,) or is bestowed upon man as a gift of sovereign mercy by union with Christ (in a religious aspect.)(*)

(1) Iren. iv. 29, p. 285 : "Εδει δε τὸν ἄνθρωπον πρῶτον γενέσθαι, και για νόμενον αὐξῆσαι, καὶ αὐξήσαντα ἀνδρωθῆναι, καὶ ἀνδρωθέντα πληθυνθῆναι, καὶ πληθυνθέντα ἐνισχύσαι, καὶ ἐνισχύσαντα δοξασθῆν, καὶ δοξασθέντα ἰδεῖν τὸν iKUTOŭ dECTÓTη). Min. Fel. 17 and 18 ab init. Tatian, Or. Contra Gr. c. 12 and 19, Clem. Coh. p. 78. According to the latter, man is the most beautiful hymn to the praise of the Deity, p. 78, a heavenly plant (púrov oùgávov) p. 80, and, generally speaking, the principal object of the love of God, Pæd. i. 3, p. 102. Comp. p. 158. Pad. iii. 7. p. 276 : Φύσει γὰρ ὁ ἄνθρωπος ὑψηλόν ἐστι ζῶον καὶ γαῦρον καὶ τοῦ καλοῦ ζητητικόν, ib. iii. 8, p. 292. But all the good he possesses is not innate in such a manner as that it ought not to be developed by instruction (uános.) Comp. Strom. i. 6, p. 336; iv. 23, p. 632; vi. 11, p. 788; vii. 4, p. 839, and the passages on human liberty, which will be found below.

(2) Some of the Alexandrian theologians, however, wishing to speak more accurately, taught that man had been created not so much after the image of God himself, as after the image of the Logos, an image after an image! Coh. p. 78: 'Huv yag rou Θεοῦ εἰκὼν ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ, καὶ υἱὸς τοῦ νοῦ γνήσιος ὁ θεῖος λόγος, φωτὸς ἀρχέτυ πον φῶς· εἰκὼν δὲ τοῦ λόγου ὁ ἄνθρωπος· ἀληθινὸς ὁ νοῦς ὁ ἐν ἀνθρώπῳ, ὁ κατ' εἰκόνα τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ καθ ̓ ὁμοίωσιν διὰ τοῦτο γεγενῆσθαι λεγόμενος, τῇ κατὰ καρδίαν φρονήσει τῷ θείῳ παρεικαζόμενος λόγω, καὶ ταύτῃ λογικός. Comp. Strom. v. 14, p. 703, and Orig. Comment. in Joh. p. 941. Opp. T. iv. p. 19, 51, in Luc. hom. viii. Opp. T. iii.

(3) This idea was connected with another, according to which God was supposed to possess a body (see above) or with the notion that the body of Christ had been the image after which the body of man had been created. (The author of the Clementine

Homilies also thought that the body in particular bore the image of God, comp. Piper on Melito, 1. c. p. 74, 75.) Tert. de carne Christi, c. 6, adv. Marc. v. 8, adv. Prax. 12. Neander, Antign. p. 407, ss. The more spiritual view was, that the life of the soul, partaking of the Divine nature, shines through the physical organism, and is reflected especially on the countenance of man, in his looks, etc. Tatian, Or. c. 15, ( Worth, c. 24): Ψυχὴ μὲν οὖν ἡ τῶν ἀνθρώπων πολυμερής ἐστι καὶ οὐ μονομερής. Συνθεση (al. συνετή according to Fronto Ducæus, comp. Daniel, p. 202) γάρ ἐστιν ὡς εἶναι φανερὰν αὐτὴν διὰ σώματος, οὔτε γὰρ ἂν αὐτὴ φανείη ποτὲ χωρὶς σώματος οὔτε ἀνίσταται ἡ σὰρξ χωρίς ψυχῆς. Clem. Coh. p. 52. Strom. v. 14, p. 703 : Ψυχὴν δὲ τὴν λογικὴν ἄνωθεν ἐμπνευσθῆναι ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰς πρόσωπον. On this account the Fathers of the Alexandrian school very decidedly oppose the material conception of a bodily copy of the Divine image. Clem. Strom. ii. 19, p. 483 : Τὸ γὰρ κατ ̓ εἰκόνα καὶ ὁμοίωσιν, ὡς καὶ πρόσθεν εἰρήκαμεν, οὐ τὸ κατὰ σῶμα μηνύεται· οὐ γὰρ θέμις θνητὸν ἀθανάτῳ ἐξομοιοῦσθαι· ἀλλ ̓ ἢ κατὰ νοῦν καὶ λογισμόν. On the other hand, it is indeed remarkable that the same Clement, Pad. ii. 10, p. 220, should recognize the image of God in the procreative power of man, which others connect with the existence of evil spirits (§ 51): Εἰκὼν ὁ ἄνθρωπος τοῦ Θεοῦ γίνεται, καθὸ εἰς γένεσιν ἀνθρώπου ἄνθρωπος συνεργεῖ. Origen refers the Divine image exclusively to the spirit of man, c. Cels. vi. Opp. i. p. 680, and Hom. i. in Genes. Opp. T. ii. p. 57.

:

[ocr errors]

( The tautological phrase, Gen. i. 26: 12/1979 induced the Fathers to make an arbitrary distinction between 073 (εικών) and 1157 (ὁμοίωσις.) comp. Schott, Opuscul. Τ. ii. p. 66, ss. Irenæus adv. Hær. v. 6, p. 299. v. 16, p. 313 : Ἐν τοῖς πρόσθεν χρόνοις ἐλέγετο μὲν κατ' εἰκόνα Θεοῦ γεγονέναι τὸν ἄνθρωπον, οὐκ ἐδείς κνυτο δέ· ἔτι γὰρ ἀόρατος ἦν ὁ λόγος, οὗ κατ ̓ εἰκόνα ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐγεγόνει. Διὰ τοῦτο δὴ καὶ τὴν ὁμοίωσιν ῥᾳδίως ἀπέβαλεν. ̔Οπότε δε σὰρξ ἐγένετο ὁ λόγος, τοῦ Θεοῦ τὰ ἀμφότερα ἐπεκύρωσε· καὶ γὰς καὶ τὴν εἰκόνα ἔδειξεν ἀληθῶς, αὐτὸς τοῦτο γενόμενος ὅπερ ἦν ἡ εἰκὼν αὐτοῦ· καὶ τὴν ὁμοίωσιν βεβαίως κατέστησε συνεξα ομοιώσας τὸν ἄνθρωπον τῷ ἀοράτῳ πατρί. According to some the language of Clem. Strom. ii. p. 499, (418, Sylb.) implies that the image of God is communicated to man εὐθέως κατὰ τήν γένεσιν, and that he obtains the resemblance ὕστερον κατὰ τὴν τελείωσιν. Accord ing to Tert. de bapt. c. 5, man attains unto resemblance to God by baptism. According to Origen, who everywhere insists upon the spontaneity of man, the resemblance of God which is to be

« PoprzedniaDalej »