Monitum ad Origenis exegetica in Leviticum

ADMONITION TO ORIGEN'S EXEGETICAL WORKS ON LEVITICUS.

That Origen wrote excerpts or scholia on Leviticus is witnessed by Jerome in Rufinus, Book II of his Invectives. He wrote, says he, on Genesis thirteen books; of mystical homilies two books; on Exodus Excerpts; on Leviticus Excerpts. Of these nothing survives today, unless perhaps those ἐκλογαί (selections) on Leviticus, which are circulated under the name of Origen in the manuscript Greek Catenae and are presented in the first place in this our edition, exhibit something taken thence.

Besides the Excerpts, Rufinus admonishes in the conclusion to his translation of the Commentaries of the same Origen on the Epistle to the Romans that he translated into Latin Origen's homilies on Leviticus. Cassiodorus in On the Institution of Divine Letters, first chapter, mentions sixteen. I have left for you, says he, by the Lord's grant, if you wish to read them, the homilies of the aforesaid Origen, that is, on Genesis sixteen, on Exodus twelve, on Leviticus sixteen. Just so many today, here and there, both in the preceding editions of the works of Origen and in very ancient manuscript codices, bear the name of Origen before them. Certainly among them one manuscript codex of Saint-Germain written in uncial letters seems to belong to about the sixth or seventh century of the Church. Besides, Jonas, Bishop of Orléans, who flourished in the ninth century, in Book I of On Lay Instruction, chaps. 5, 16, and 18, adduces various fragments from the homilies of Origen which are read in the same words in the sixteen homilies of today. Finally, the manuscript Catenae on Leviticus ascribe to Origen a Greek fragment which corresponds very closely to the second number of the eighth homily. There is therefore no room for doubting that they are truly Origen's.

Nor ought it to move anyone that a Greek fragment from the second homily on Leviticus is found in the first chapter of the Philocalia, of which you may find not even a tittle in the second homily of the Latin edition, or in the others. For 1st, Who could affirm for certain that this homily was not curtailed and mutilated in that passage by Rufinus, whom we shall prove below to be their genuine translator? 2nd, That the homilies of Origen were selected and arranged in various ways according to the pleasure of translators or students, and that there were diverse collections of them, of which some had more, others fewer homilies, is proved from this: both because Jonas, Bishop of Orléans, in Book I of On Lay Instruction, chap. 5, exhibits from the first homily of Origen on Leviticus a fragment which today's editions present only in the second; and because, although in the fourth homily Origen says that he has already often treated above concerning linen garments, and in the sixth homily that he has here and there and often discoursed concerning the consecration of the priest and the anointing, yet nothing of the sort is extant in the preceding ones; and finally because, since the homilies on Jeremiah rendered into Latin by Jerome are placed in another order in the Latin edition than in the Greek codices, where sometimes more, sometimes fewer in number are found, it is easy to suppose that the same thing happened to the homilies on Leviticus, and that there were various collections of them, in one of which that homily whence came forth the fragment of the Philocalia—a homily which is absent from today's collection—held the second place.

It may also be objected that those homilies are also found among the books of Saint Cyril: But, says Bellarmine in On Ecclesiastical Writers, no. 225, they are truly Origen's, not Saint Cyril's: for they both keep the style of Origen and abound in his errors. Add to this that from the fourth number of the seventh homily it is clear that these homilies were delivered at Caesarea in Palestine, where Saint Cyril is handed down by no monument of ecclesiastical history to have delivered discourses to the people.

Now that no other translator of these homilies than Rufinus ought to be sought, I briefly demonstrate. Gennadius witnesses that whatever of Origen was translated was translated by Rufinus, except the things that Jerome translated. But the latter in his Catalogue, recounting by name the things that he translated from Origen, makes no mention of the homilies on Leviticus; and Rufinus in the conclusion which he added to the Commentaries on the Epistle to the Romans professes that he translated Origen's homilies on Leviticus. For I confess, says he, most loving brother Heraclius, that while I desire to satisfy your wishes, I have almost forgotten the commandment whereby it is enjoined, Do not lift a burden above your strength: although for us in the other things also which at your urgency, nay rather exacting the task of daily work, we have translated into Latin, very much labour was not wanting, while we desired to supply the things that were delivered extempore by Origen in the lecture-room of the Church with the intention not so much of explanation as of edification; just as we did in the homilies or short discourses on Genesis and on Exodus, and especially in these on the book of Leviticus, which were delivered by him, indeed, in the style of preaching, but translated by us in the form of exposition. Which labour of filling up the things that were wanting we undertook for this reason, lest questions touched upon and left, as is wont to be done by him in the homiletic kind of speaking, should breed weariness in the Latin reader. Yet would that he had refrained from this labour of filling up the things that were wanting! For through his licence it has come about that he who reads these homilies is uncertain whether he is reading Origen or Rufinus. For the rest, since in the judgement of Rufinus they were delivered extempore, they could not have been delivered until after the year of Christ 245, as we have said in the admonition to the homilies on Exodus.