Greco-Christian stream·Patrologia (Church Fathers)·Africanus to Origen — Origen of Alexandria
Africanus's letter to Origen — Susanna question
Julius Africanus's letter to Origen questioning the canonical authenticity of the Susanna narrative (Daniel 13 in the Greek). Argues from internal Hebrew vs Greek evidence.
Source context
- Theme
- Origen of Alexandria as early Church Father preserving living mystery-wisdom within Christian exegesis
Steiner
- GA 91, 1904-08-19Steiner notes that earlier Church Fathers such as Origen and Clement of Alexandria regarded their written output as only a fraction of the living wisdom they possessed, valuing the immediate spoken word over written transmission.
- GA 93, 1905-05-29Steiner cites Origen as the earliest literary source for the tradition that Adam was buried on Golgotha, tracing this back to a second-century tradition preserved by the Alexandrian Church Father.
- GA 87, 1902-04-05Steiner characterises the Greek Church Fathers' writings as reflecting a development of the old mystery tradition, situating Origen's Alexandrian milieu within that trajectory.
- GA 87, 1902-02-15Steiner, drawing on his studies of the Church Fathers, identifies the difficulty of reconstructing the genuine doctrines of early Christian writers who were subsequently labelled heretical or marginalised by later ecclesial authority.
Cross-tradition
- Neoplatonism (Plotinus / Porphyry)Cross-tradition congruence: Origen's Alexandrian intellectual environment overlaps structurally with the Neoplatonic school in its integration of Logos-cosmology with contemplative askesis, making the two streams mutually illuminating at the level of spiritual-cognitive method.
- Jewish Alexandrian exegesis (Philo)Cross-tradition congruence: Origen's allegorical-exegetical method shares structural features with Philo of Alexandria's typological reading of Torah, both treating the literal text as a veil for esoteric cosmological and soul-developmental meanings.
Africanus to Origen
Origen of Alexandria
[Chapter 1 (¶1)] About the History of Susanna.
[Chapter 1 (¶2)] Greeting, my lord and son, most worthy Origen, from Africanus. In your sacred discussion with Agnomon you referred to that prophecy of Daniel which is related of his youth. This at that time, as was meet, I accepted as genuine. Now, however, I cannot understand how it escaped you that this part of the book is spurious. For, in truth, this section, although apart from this it is elegantly written, is plainly a more modern forgery. There are many proofs of this. When Susanna is condemned to die, the prophet is seized by the Spirit, and cries out that the sentence is unjust. Now, in the first place, it is always in some other way that Daniel prophesies— by visions, and dreams, and an angel appearing to him, never by prophetic inspiration. Then, after crying out in this extraordinary fashion, he detects them in a way no less incredible, which not even Philistion the play-writer would have resorted to. For, not satisfied with rebuking them through the Spirit, he placed them apart, and asked them severally where they saw her committing adultery. And when the one said, Under a holm-tree (prinos ), he answered that the angel would saw him asunder (prisein ); and in a similar fashion menaced the other who said, Under a mastich-tree (schinos ), with being rent asunder (schisthenai ). Now, in Greek, it happens that holm-tree and saw asunder, and rend and mastich-tree sound alike; but in Hebrew they are quite distinct. But all the books of the Old Testament have been translated from Hebrew into Greek.
[Chapter 1 §2] Moreover, how is it that they who were captives among the Chaldæans, lost and won at play, thrown out unburied on the streets, as was prophesied of the former captivity, their sons torn from them to be eunuchs, and their daughters to be concubines, as had been prophesied; how is it that such could pass sentence of death, and that on the wife of their king Joakim, whom the king of the Babylonians had made partner of his throne? Then if it was not this Joakim, but some other from the common people, whence had a captive such a mansion and spacious garden? But a more fatal objection is, that this section, along with the other two at the end of it, is not contained in the Daniel received among the Jews. And add that, among all the many prophets who had been before, there is no one who has quoted from another word for word. For they had no need to go a-begging for words, since their own were true; but this one, in rebuking one of those men, quotes the words of the Lord: The innocent and righteous shall you not slay. From all this I infer that this section is a later addition. Moreover, the style is different. I have struck the blow; do you give the echo; answer, and instruct me. Salute all my masters. The learned all salute you. With all my heart I pray for your and your circle's health.
[Chapter 1 (¶4)] Source. Translated by Frederick Crombie. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0413.htm.
JSON: /api/sources/patrologia/origenes--africanus-to-origen.json