On the "Rewriting" or Falsifying of Books of Origen at Caesarea

The history of early Christian texts is complex, often involving multiple revisions and redactions. A notable example is the works of Origen, a prolific theologian of the early Church, whose texts were subject to significant alterations. Eusebius of Caesarea, a historian and bishop, is frequently implicated in the "rewriting" or "falsifying" of Origen's works, aligning them with the theological orthodoxies of the time. This blog post delves into the evidence and implications of these revisions, highlighting the role of Eusebius in reshaping early Christian literature.

Origen's Works and Their Transmission

Origen, an influential theologian and scholar, wrote extensively on Christian doctrine. However, the transmission of his works is fraught with complications. Many of his later works were supposedly written in Caesarea, although they were originally composed in Alexandria. This claim, however, is contested by scholars who argue that Eusebius extensively revised these texts to fit the emerging Nicene orthodoxy and his personal theological interests.

Evidence of Rewriting

1. Preface of Against Celsus: The preface of Origen's Against Celsus contains a curious disclaimer:

   "Origen" (Eusebius) says in the preface that Ambrose "commissioned" him to write Against Celsus even though, he writes, Jesus didn't respond to the false accusations of his accusers.

   This preface suggests that the existing text of Against Celsus might be a second draft, likely rewritten by Eusebius in the fourth century. The passage hints at a significant revision, not merely a preface addition but a wholesale reworking of the original manuscript.

2. Commentary on John: The Sixth Book of Origen's Commentary on John mentions:

   "I composed the material given me as far as the fifth volume even though the storm in Alexandria seemed to work against me..."

   This statement indicates that Origen began this work in Alexandria but completed it in Caesarea, under different circumstances and possibly under different influences.

Eusebius' Role and Motivations

Eusebius was known for his prolific writing and his strong stance against Arianism. His involvement in the redaction of Origen's texts can be seen as an effort to align these works with the orthodoxy established at the Council of Nicaea. The motivations for such revisions could include:

• Anti-Arian Orthodoxy: To eliminate any elements that could be interpreted as supporting Arianism or other heresies.
• Theological Alignment: To ensure that Origen's works supported the emerging Nicene Creed.
• Personal Interests: Eusebius might have had personal theological views that he wanted reflected in Origen's influential works.

The "Confession" in the Preface

The preface to Against Celsus can be interpreted as a confession of sorts, where the "author" admits to rewriting the original text. Chadwick translates this section, highlighting the change in methodology:

"The preface may serve as my apology for the fact that I wrote the beginning of my answer to Celsus on one plan, but after the first part followed a different one..."

This passage implies that the initial draft of the work was revised extensively, possibly to the point where the original arguments were altered or omitted.

Origen's Commentary on Matthew

The Commentary on Matthew was supposedly written entirely at Caesarea towards the end of Origen's life. Eusebius, in his Ecclesiastical History, notes that Origen's patron, Ambrose, provided him with the necessary resources to continue his work. However, the reality of Origen having access to such resources after fleeing Alexandria is questionable. This situation further suggests that Eusebius, who had the resources, might have played a significant role in the production and revision of these texts.

Implications of Revisions

The implications of these revisions are profound:

• Theological Consistency: Eusebius' revisions ensured that Origen's works were consistent with the Nicene orthodoxy, which shaped the theological landscape of early Christianity.
• Historical Authenticity: The authenticity of Origen's works is compromised by these revisions, raising questions about the true nature of his theological positions.
• Literary Control: The control exerted by Eusebius over Origen's texts reflects broader practices of literary control and censorship in early Christianity.

Conclusion

The rewriting or falsifying of Origen's books at Caesarea highlights the complexities of early Christian literature. Eusebius' role in these revisions underscores the influence of theological and personal motivations in shaping the transmission of foundational Christian texts. Understanding these revisions provides critical insights into the development of early Christian doctrine and the historical authenticity of theological writings.