No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
Origen's fullest statement on the selection of church officers occurs in his Homily in Numbers 13.4. The following is a fairly literal translation of the passage:
At the end of his life he prayed to God that He would provide a leader for the people. What are you doing, O Moses? Are not Gersom and Eleazar your sons? Or if you distrust any one of these, are not the sons of your brother great and distinguished men? Why do you not pray to God for them so that He might appoint them leaders of the people? But the leaders in office of the churches should learn not to designate by testimony nor to deliver the leadership of the churches as an inheritance to those who are related to them by blood or are associated with them by fleshly closeness, but to submit to the choice of God and not to choose that one whom human affection commends but to grant entirely to the judgment of God the choice of a successor. Was not Moses able to choose a ruler for the people by a true judgment and to make choice by a correct and just sentence, to whom God had said, “Choose elders for the people, whom you know to be the elders,” and he chose such in whom immediately God's “spirit rested, and they all prophesied.” who therefore is able to choose a leader of the people unless Moses was able? But he did not do it, did not choose, did not dare it. Why did he not dare? That he would not leave to posterity an example of presumption. But listen to what he says, “Let the Lord, the God of spirits and all flesh, provide a man over this congregation, who shall go out and come in before them and who shall lead them forth and lead them back.” If therefore such a one as Moses gives not his judgment in choosing a leader of the people, in appointing a successor, what man would be he who dares to do so, whether of the people who are always accustomed to be moved by shouts for favor or perhaps excited for money, or of the priests themselves who will there be who would judge himself equal to this task, except only him to whom through prayers and petitions it is revealed by God? And just as God says to Moses, “Take to yourself Joshua the son of Nun, a man who has the spirit in him, and lay your hands upon him; and stand him before Eleazar the priest, and command him in the presence of the whole congregation and commission him from yourself before them; and give your honor to him that the children of Israel may hear him.” You hear obviously the ordination of a leader of the people clearly described, so that there is almost no need of exposition. Here there was held no acclamation of the people, no regard of kinship, no consideration of friendship.… The government of the people is delivered to him whom God chose.
1. The text used is that of Baehrens, W. A. in Die griechischen chrietliche Schriftsteller, Origenes Werke 7.Google Scholar
2. Göller, Emil, “Die Bischofswahl bei Origenes,” Ehrengabe Deutscher Wissenschaft, ed. Franz, Fessler (Freiburg, 1920), pp. 611–615.Google Scholar Göller recognizes that in practice the influence of the clergy at elections was strong enough that their relatives were often chosen. Origen's information on the clergy has been assembled by Harnack, Adolf von, “Der Kirchengeschichtliche Ertag der Exegetisehen Arbeiten des Origenes,” Texte und Untersuchungen (Leipzig, 1918)Google Scholar, Dritte Reihe, 12:3, 72–77 and 12:4, 129–140.
3. Telfer, W., “Episcopal Succession in Egypt,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 3 (1952): 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Müller, Karl, “Kleine Beiträge zur alten Kirchengeschichte,” Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 28 (1949): 283.Google Scholar
5. Gore, Charles, The Church and the Ministry, new edition revised (London, 1949), pp. 126–129.Google Scholar
6. Telfer, p. 5.
7. Kemp, E. W., “Bishops and Presbyters at Alexandria,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 6 (1955): 129–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Theodoret H. E. 4.20 and 5.23. I follow the Greek text of the second edition of Theodoret in GCS.
9. Translated from the Greek text of Lanchert, Friedrich, Die Kanones der wichtigsten altkirchlichen Concilien (Freiburg, 1896).Google Scholar This practice may be the occasion for the positive canon requiring the presence of other bishops at ordination— can. 19.
10. PG 67, 192fGoogle Scholar. Cheirotonein may have the generalized sense of “appoint” (choose to be a successor), but this seems precluded by the fact that Alexander had named two possibilities. Later in the context the word is used once to mean “elect” and twice to mean “ordain.” For the terminology see my “Eusebius and Ordination,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 13 (1962): 139ff.Google Scholar
11. Horn. 7.5.3. Translated from the Greek text edited by Rehm for GCS.
12. Ibid., 8.3; 12.2; 20.23.3. These passages all seem to come from a late stage in the reduction of the Homilies. Contrast 1 Clement 44.2 where the apostles appointed bishops from the firstfruits of their converts at the locality concerned; see Eusebius H. E. 3.37 Origen Hom. in Num. 11.4 refers to the missionary himself becoming the bishop.
13. Strack, H. L. and Billerbeck, Paul, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament (München, 1924), 2:647ff.Google Scholar; Newman, J., Scmikah (Manchester, 1950), pp. 109ffGoogle Scholar; and my “Jewish and Christian Ordination,” Harvard Theological Review 56 (1963): 13–19.Google Scholar
14. Everett, Ferguson, “Attitudes to Schism at the Council of Nicaea,” in Studies in Church History, Volume 9Google Scholar: Schism, Heresy and Religious Protest, ed. Derek Baker (Cambridge, 1972), p. 62.Google Scholar
15. Didas. 9 in Connolly, R. H., Didascalia Apostolorum (Oxford, 1929), p. 96.Google Scholar Chapter 4 (p. 30) does provide for the congregation “to give testimony that he is worthy” in the election of a bishop.
16. Cyprian notes that his practice was to fill positions in the clergy with the approval of the rest of the clergy and of the people, an approval which could be dispensed with in times of emergency—Ep. 38.1, 2. The ordination prayer of a presbyter in the Apostolic Constitutions 8.16 describes the ordinand as “put into the presbytery by the vote and determination of the whole clergy.” The sixth canon of Theophilus of Alexandria calls for clerical choice and popular ratification in orders below the bishop.
17. In the circumstance cited by Socrates and referred to at note 10 above Bishop Alexander of Constantinople, although he had not ordained a successor, “had enjoined the proper persons to select one of the two whom he nominated.”
18. Note the sequence in Cyprian's statement, “Cornelius was made bishop by the judgment of God and His Christ, by the testimony (testimonio) of nearly all the clergy, by the vote of the people who were present, by the company of old priests and good men [the neighboring bishops] ”—Ep. 55.9.
19. See Apos. Trad. 2.2.
20. Vita S. Greg. Thaum. in PG 46, 933ff.Google Scholar
21. Busolt, Georg, Griechische Staatskunde (“Handbuch der Klassischen Altertumswissenschaft” München, 1920), p. 1071.Google Scholar
In the Vita Polyc. 22 the deacons are sent to the assembled laity to inquire concerning their vote, very much as the herald called for a show of hands in Greek elections.
22. The term psēphos is used for vote in the above passage, but the words in this family had long since come to mean “vote” without reference to mode, Siotis, Markos A., “Die Klassische und die Christliche Cheirotonie in ihrem Verhältnis,” Theologia 20 (1949): 725ff.Google Scholar and 21 (1949):459.
23. Busolt, pp. 1000, 1071; Franz, Poland, Geschichte des Griechischen Vereinswesens, Priesschriften von. der Fürstlich Jablonowskischen Gessellschaft zu Leipzig (Leipzig, 1909), 38:417.Google Scholar
24. Krauss, Samuel, Synagogale Altertümer (Berlin, 1922), pp. 152–154.Google Scholar
25. Ferguson, E., “Qumran and Codex D,” Revue de Qumran 8:29 (1972): 77.Google Scholar
26. Apos. Trad. 2.1; Cyprian, , Ep, 55.9Google Scholar; 59.5, 6; 68.2; 67.3; 4; for later sources see Optatus De schism. Donat. 1:18Google Scholar: Gesta apud Zenophilum; 10; Possidius Vita S. Angus, 4.
27. Or. 18.33. See “Nectarius was seized by the people and proposed for the episcopate of Constantinople,” Socrates H. E. 5.8.Google Scholar
28. Vita S. Mart. 9.
29. Althanasius, Apol. c. Arian, 6Google Scholar. For popular acclamations at Alexandria see also Theodoret, H. E. 4.20.Google Scholar
30. Ambrose, Ep. 63.2Google Scholar, “Justly was it believed that he whom all had demanded was elected by the judgment of God.”
31. Paulinus, Vita. S. Amb. 3.6.Google Scholar
32. Eusebuis, H.E. 6.29.Google Scholar
33. Hom. in Lev. 6.3. Origen's language is very similar to that used by Cyprian Ep. 67.4. The sixth canon of Theophilus of Alexandria forbids secret ordinations. The ordination liturgy of the Apostolic Constitutions prescribes a public examination of the candidate in which the people are called upon three times to testify to his worthiness before the ordination can proceed (8.4.2ff.). In the Testament of our Lord this is stylized into a formal cry of Axios following the ordination prayer.
34. Jerome, Ep. 146Google Scholar; Brooks, E. W., The Sixth Book of the Select Letters of Severus Patriarch of Antioch, 2: 213Google Scholar; Eutychius, in PG 111, 982.Google Scholar The latest statement of the case and with some new results is by Telfer (n. 3). Lécuyer, L. has shown the inconsistencies in the three sources in “Le problème des consérvations épiscopales dans I'êglise d'Alexandrie,” Bulletin de littéature ecclésiatique (1964), 241.257;Google Scholar he has also undertaken a point by point refutation of Telfer in “La succession des éveques d'Alexandrie aux premiers siècles,” Bulletin de littérature ecclésiactique (1969), 80–99.Google Scholar He puts too much reliance on Vita Saturn. 8 in the Historia Augusta for bishops in Egypt at an early date, but more importantly he does not overthrow the main point or offer conclusive evidence against it. His four arguments to challenge the testimony of Jerome are (1) the silence of Ambrosiaster, (2) the evidence of Origen which we are considering, (3) the possibility that the Apostolic Tradition derives from Egypt and (4) the later idea that it was a heresy to identify presbyters with bishops.
35. Müller, p. 278.
36. For the importance of seating in the chair see pp. 16–19 of my article referred to in note 13. Eutychius' account is different: the twelve presbyters elect one of their number and “laying their hands on his head bless him and make him patriarch” and then elect a replacement to keep the number at twelve. Lécuyer, “La succession,” p. 92 suggests that the Arabic may refer to election, not imposition of hands, as in the Latin translation (which I have rendered), but if so there is a redundant second reference to election in the sentence. Severus simply says that the bishop of Alexandria “was in old times appointed by presbyters” but after Nicaea his institution was performed by bishops.
37. Translated from the Latin version of Haneburg printed by Acheis, Hans, “Die Canones Hippolyti,” Texte und Untersuchungen 6 (1891)Google Scholar. Riedel, Wilhelm, Die Kirchenrechtsqueflen des Patriarchata Alexandrien (Leipzig, 1900), p. 203Google Scholar gives a briefer rendering of the Arabic into German: “If a presbyter is ordained, the same things are done as with a bishop, with the exception of the word ‘bishop.’ The bishop is in every relationship like the presbyter, except for the throne and ordination, for no power to ordain is given to the presbyter.” A French version is given by René-Georges, Coquin, Les Canons d'Hippolyte in Patrologia Orientalis, ed. Griffin, R. and Nau, F., 31:2 (Paris, 1966).Google Scholar
38. “The Ordination Prayer for a Presbyter in the Church Order of Hippolytus,” Journal of Theological Studies 16 (1915): 542–547.Google Scholar Turner's solution is rejected by Barlêa, Octavian, Die Weihe der Bishöfe, Presbyter, und Diakone in Vornicänischer Zeit (München, 1969), p. 229.Google Scholar
39. Gore, p. 37: Lècuyer, , “La problème”, and “La succession,” p. 83.Google Scholar
40. English translation by Evetts, B. in Patrologia Orientalis, ed. Griffin, R. and Nau, F., Tome I, Fascicules 2 and 4.Google Scholar
41. Ibid., p. 153.
42. “When Abba Theonas, the patriarch, went to his rest, the clergy of Alexandria assembled with the people and laid their hands upon Peter the priest, his son and disciple, and seated him upon the episcopal throne of Alexandria,” ibid., p. 383. Even Eutychius' number twelve for the presbyters at Alexandria may reflect an old tradition. Clement of Alexandria Strom. 6.13.107, understands the twenty-four elders of the Apocalypse as representing twelve Jewish and twelve gentile (Christian?) elders; and see the twelve elders of the Pseudo-Clementine Hom. 11.36.2.
43. Telfer, p. 10.
44. PL 68, 1036f.
45. Hom. Jer. 12:3: en toutois tois hiereusi (dicknumi de tous presbyterious ēmas).
46. Hom. in Lev. 6.3.
47. Wissowa, Georg, Religion und Kultus der Römer (“Handbuch der Klassischen Altertums-wissenschaft”; zweite Auflage; München, 1912), pp. 487, 495.Google Scholar
48. Sanhedrin 4.3, 4; b Sanhedrin 17b.
49. Frey, J. B., “Les communautés Juives à Rome,” Recherches de science religieuse 21 (1931): 136.Google Scholar
50. The meagre evidence is in Tcherikover, Victor A. and Fuks, Alexander, eds., Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1957), 1:10, 57, 101.Google Scholar
51. Hom. sa Josh. 23.2 comments about the selection of a successor to Judas: “Seeing that prayer precedes, the lot is not by chance but leads to a divine choice by providence.”
52. Origen's word iudicium is also Cyprian's in the passage cited in note 18; see also Ep. 59.5 and 68.2 and Ambrose in the passage cited in note 30.
53. Acts 13:1–3; I Tim. 1:18; 4:14. See Clement, of Alexandria, Quis dives 42.Google Scholar
54. Cyprian, Ep. 48.3Google Scholar; 55.9; 61.3; Vita S. Mart 9;Eusebius H. E. 6.29; Theodoret, H. E. 4.7.4.Google Scholar