Two Ancient Christologies, R V Sellers, p. 26f

Home / Two Ancient Christologies, R V Sellers, p. 26f

But while Origen can thus make a valuable contribution to sound Christological thought, it is clear that his teaching contains conceptions which have their root in the Greek religious ideal. Emphasis is laid on the thought that Jesus Christ is “the Pattern of the most virtuous life”, and it is in keeping with this that Origen can say that the Lord’s manhood, after the earthly sojourning, is changed into the “ethereal and divine”: He is “the same” in God. The doctrine that Christ is the Redeemer who comes into the world to ransom mankind from the tyranny of sin has indeed its place in the system of this great teacher, but he distinguishes between this, the redemption bound up with time, and the work of the Logos in revealing to man the knowledge of God—a work which transcends time. Apparently, it is the consideration that men vary according to need and capacity that moves him to make this distinction. Though Jesus Christ is one, he says, He is more things than one according to the relations (ἐπινοίναι) in which He is seen by His beholders: He did not appear the same to the sick who stood at the foot of the Mount of Transfiguration as to those who be reason of their strength were able to go up the mountain and there to see Him in His diviner appearance. There are those, he teaches, who need Him as Physician, Shepherd, and Redemption; but there are others—”those who by reason of their perfectness (διά τελειότητα) are able to receive the best gifts”—who, needing Him as such no longer, see Him as Wisdom, Logos, Righteousness. For whereas to sinners He is sent as Physician, to those who are already pure and sin no more, He is sent as “Teacher of the divine mysteries”. Certainly this is an unsatisfactory element  in Origen’s Christology: Jesus Christ is shown to be, not so much as the Healer of the fallen race, as the Illuminator of the individual who, seeking to “know himself”, accepts Hims as Guide both here and hereafter, when, like the Guide Himself, he is “separated from bodily matter”. Such ideas, as is clear, reveal the influence of the religious thought of the Greeks. But his is not to say that the Christian foundations have been removed. Rather, those foundations remain intact, and all that we have here is a part of the superstructure which, as must be acknowledged, is inconsistent with them.