Ilaria L. E. Ramelli

Alexandre d’Aphrodise et Origène sont deux philosophes et professeurs de philosophie semi-contemporains qui composaient le même genre d’œuvres. Origène était un philosophe chrétien, ancien élève d’Ammonius Saccas, le maître de Plotin. Il est très probable qu’Origène connaissait les écrits d’Alexandre d’Aphrodise, qui étaient lus à l’école de Plotin, et fut inspiré par eux. Beaucoup d’éléments soutiennent ma thèse. Par exemple, le Traité des Principes d’Origène dans sa structure est probablement emprunté à l’œuvre homonyme d’Alexandre d’Aphrodise ; l’expression ἦν ποτε ὅτε οὐκ ἦν est utilisée pour la pre­mière fois – ce qui est très intéressant – justement par Alexandre et par Origène, qui très probablement la transféra du débat philosophique sur l’éternité du cosmos à la théologie trinitaire chrétienne ; la notion d’hypostase comme « substance indi­viduelle », qui devient technique chez Origène et exercera une influence énorme sur la théologie trinitaire chrétienne, était présente dans le Moyen Platonisme, ainsi que chez des auteurs médicaux du Haut Empire qui très probablement inspi­rèrent Origène, et peut-être chez Alexandre aussi ; Origène modifie la doctrine stoïcienne de la mixtion dans un sens qui s’approche d’Alexandre et de sa critique de cette doctrine ; la conception de ὕλη/ὑποκείμενον et εἶδος chez Origène révèle des influences manifestes d’Aristote et peut-être d’Alexandre ; la présentation et la réfutation de la pensée déterministe stoïcienne sont les mêmes chez Alexandre et Origène ; la théorie de Dieu comme Intellect et toute la caractérisation de Dieu a des parallèles étonnants chez Alexandre et Origène ; la doctrine de l’âme et celle des Idées aussi ont des ressemblances impressionnantes chez les deux philosophes. La relation d’Origène à la philosophie (qui fait l’objet d’un débat critique) est éclaircie à la lumière des nouvelles contributions de la présente recherche.

This volume collects the thoroughly revised and expanded versions of the papers, with the relevant response, presented at two interrelated workshops at the 2015 Oxford Patristics Conference, on theology and philosophy between Origen and Gregory of Nyssa, and on theology in Evagrius Ponticus between Origen, the Cappadocians, and Neoplatonism. This volume contributes innova- tive research into core theological issues in Evagrius and the Cappadocians, also against the backdrop of Origen’s thought and contemporary Neoplatonism. A profound continuity emerges between Evagrius’ theology and the theology of Origen and the Cappadocians, with particular attention paid to Gregory of Nyssa. The latter’s influence on Evagrius’ thought still needs to be investigated systematically; a substantial contribution towards this important desideratum is hopefully offered in the present volume. Thanks also to the research offered in this volume, Evagrius’ theology emerges more and more as part and parcel of Cappadocian theology, within the Origenian line, and thus in relation to Neoplatonism (‘pagan’ and Christian). In this connection, pointing out the so far overlooked link between Nyssen and Evagrius is crucial.

This essay investigates Clement’s terminology related to allegorical exegesis of Scripture (μυστήριον first of all, but also αἴνιγμα, τύπος, ἀλληγορία, παραβολή etc.), as well as theoretical and methodological issues related to Biblical allegoresis (i.e. the figural, spiritual exegesis of the Bible, which is taken to contain allegories or metaphorical, figural expressions), the influence of Stoic allegoresis of theological myths on Clement’s allegoresis of Scripture, and the impact of Philo’s Biblical allegoresis, and of Pantaenus’s scriptural exegesis, on Clement’s own spiritual exegesis of the Bible.

The authors of this volume elucidate the remarkable role played by religion in the shaping and reshaping of narrative forms in antiquity and late antiquity in a variety of ways. This is particularly evident in ancient Jewish and Christian narrative, which is in the focus of most of the contributions, but also in some “pagan” novels such as that of Heliodorus, which is dealt with as well in the third part of the volume, both in an illuminating comparison with Christian novels and in an inspiring rethinking of Heliodorus's relation to Neoplatonism. All of these essays, from different perspectives, illuminate the interplay between narrative and religion, and show how religious concerns and agendas shaped narrative forms in Judaism and early Christianity. A series of compelling and innovative articles, all based on fresh and often groundbreaking research by eminent specialists, is divided into three large sections: part one deals with ancient Jewish narrative, and part two with ancient Christian narrative, in particular gospels, acts, biographies, and martyrdoms, while part three offers a comparison with “pagan” narrative, and especially the religious novel of Heliodorus, both in terms of social perspectives and in terms of philosophical and religious agendas. Like the essays collected by Marília Futre Pinheiro, Judith Perkins, and Richard Pervo in 2013, which investigate the core role played by narratives in Christian and Jewish self-fashioning in the Roman Empire, the present volume fruitfully bridges the disciplinary gap between classical studies and ancient Jewish and Christian studies, offers new insights, and hopefully opens up new paths of inquiry. Contributions by (in alphabetical order): Cathryn Chew, Mark J. Edwards, Erich Gruen, Vincent Hunink, David Konstan, Karen King, Dennis MacDonald, Laura S. Nasrallah, Judith Perkins, Richard Pervo, Ilaria Ramelli, Lautaro Roig Lanzillotta, Svetla Slaveva-Griffin, and Lawrence Wills.

This innovative book, in its monographic introduction and systematic commentary (and English translation from the Syriac based on new readings from the ms.), provides a thorough reassessment of Evagrius’ philosophical theology, Christology, and anthropology. It argues, e.g., that Evagrius is authentically Origenian, not Origenistic, nor Christologically subordinationist, and Nyssen influenced him more than usually assumed. New linguistic evidence is adduced for the differentiation of bodies in KG and Evagrius’ philosophical anthropology. This investigation is continued in a Peeters edited volume and a future monograph on Evagrius’ philosophical theology.

What is truly timeless? This book explores the language of eternity, and in particular two ancient Greek terms that may bear the sense of eternal : aiônios and aïdios. This fascinating linguistic chronicle is marked by several milestones that correspond to the emergence of new perspectives on the nature of eternity. These milestones include the advent of Pre-Socratic physical speculation and the notion of limitless time in ancient philosophy, the major shift in orientation marked by Plato s idea of a timeless eternity, and the further development of Pre-Socratic insights by Epicurean and Stoic thinkers. From the biblical perspective, the intersection of Greek and Hebrew conceptions is reflected in Septuagint, as well as new inflections in popular terminology in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, and in the role of eternity in the theology of the New Testament. The profound cross-fertilization of Christian and classical philosophical conceptions in the works of the Church fathers and their contemporaries is explored, bringing the topic into the Patristic period. Christian theology in the first five centuries of the Common Era and its choice of vocabulary prove to be most revealing of larger doctrinal commitments. Above all debate raged on the question of eternal damnation versus the idea (deemed heretical in the Christian church after the formal condemnation of Origenism) of apocastastis or universal salvation - that is, the belief that the wicked are not condemned to eternal punishment but will eventually be included among the saved. Terminology for eternity is often at the core of how these issues were debated, and helps to identify which writers inclined to one or the other view of the matter.

Commentaries in late antiquity were the predominant form of scholarly engagement with ancient, authoritative texts. Not only in Greek, but in Latin no less, ancient commentaries were an integral part of reading and understanding literature and philosophy (and theology, as part and parcel of philosophy at that time). I shall deal with commentaries (as self-standing works, different from glosses) on poetic, rhetorical, philosophical, and religious texts in Latin late antiquity, both ‘pagan’ and Christian. Grammatical and rhetorical education played a remarkable role in their preparation, and questions of adaptation and of the reuse of earlier material, especially Greek models, will also come into play.

This cutting-edge monograph has extensively demonstrated that allegoresis was part and parcel of philosophy, and more specifically a tool of philosophical theology, in Stoicism and Middle and Neoplatonism, “pagan” and Christian alike. Many Stoics and ‘pagan’ Platonists applied philosophical allegoresis to theological myths, and this operation provided the link between theology and physics (in the case of the Stoics) or metaphysics (in the case of the Platonists). Many Christian Platonists in turn, starting from Clement and Origen, applied philosophical allegoresis to the theological discourse in Scripture. [Arguments in this monograph, and further in more recent essays in English in International Journal of the Classical Tradition, Jahrbuch für Religionsphilosophie, Mnemosyne Supplements, the Brill Companion to the Reception of Homer, etc.]. This research is also extremely relevant to the intertwining of philosophy and religion in antiquity and late antiquity. It investigates one of the ways in which religion became part of the philosophical discourse, and at the same time philosophy became indispensable to religion, be this traditional “pagan” mythology and cults or newly expanding Christianity. Monograph in nine chapters plus bibliography. Chaps. I (before Stoicism), II (Ancient Stoa), III (Apollodorus and Crates of Mallus), IV (Palaephatus, his followers, and Conon), V (Cicero, Philodemus, Lucretius and other Epicureans; Philo and Josephus), VI (Cornutus and other Roman Stoics; Cornutus and Heraclitus: a comparison), VII (Chaeremon, Cebetis Tabula, Ecphantus, De vita et poësi Homeri, Plutarch), and IX (conclusions) and Bibliography by I. Ramelli; chap. VIII (Heraclitus Rhetor) by G. Lucchetta. Pp. 550

The reflections on time and eternity in patristic thinkers depend, to various degrees, both on ancient philosophy (through some authors’ philosophical formation) and on Scripture—mostly the Septuagint and/or ancient Latin versions. The most common nouns here are χρόνος (tempus in Latin) and αἰών (aevum). The latter in many patristic authors designates a long period, an age, or else this world or the world to come, according to the biblical usage analysed below. “Aeon” is divine life or a divine being or emanation only in “Gnostic” writings. After an investigation into Greek philosophy, I shall pass on to the Bible and Patristic thinkers.

The volume discusses the key documents, authors, themes and Early Christian traditions in succinct articles by eminent experts (including the Editors). The main 6 sections of the volume trace the vital trajectories of emerging distinctive Christian identity in the Graeco-Roman world and diversities of theologies. Special attention is given to the coherent growth of Christian faith in connection with worship, alongside the crucial transformation of Christian life and doctrine under the Christian Emperor. In addition, readers interested in systematic theology are offered chapters on the roots of some significant theological notions in Christian Antiquity, also with reference to ancient philosophy. The team of editors invited leading scholars from various international academic centres to contribute their comments based on their research and teaching. The book finishes with appendices and indexes giving information on biblical references, updated publications, electronic resources and classified bibliographies.

In this paper, the “self” is understood in broad terms as one’s character and personality, based on Christopher Gill’s notion of the self in Hellenistic and imperial philosophy. Moreover, my use of “self-fashioning” —that is, one’s creation of an image of oneself—in ancient Christianity, is built on the work of Carol Newsom and Eve-Marie Becker. The latter focusses on Paul, who is Origen’s hero and may even have inspired Origen’s own strategies of self-fashioning as an inspired preacher of Christ, an apostle, unjustly humiliated (and supporter of apokatastasis or universal restoration): all characteristics that Origen shared and emphasized in his self-fashioning, as will be clarified below. I draw attention to a neglected aspect of Origen’s self-fashioning, namely, its intricate connection to polemical self-positioning within society. In other words, Origen seems to define himself by reference to other Christian groups rather than positing an inner Self that is independent from society. I explore the reciprocal relationship between his polemics against others and the construction of his Self-image, suggesting that one emerged from the other. To highlight the social construction of Origen’s ‘self,’ I conclude by examining briefly how his self-fashioning influenced his subsequent readers. In his lifetime, Origen was ‘the leading intellectual of the age,’ ‘the greatest scholar and theologian of the ancient church,’ and the founder ‘of philosophical theology.’ Additionally, no Christian thinker ‘is so invisibly all-present as Origen’ in later Christian thought and exegesis. Origen’s footprint in Platonism, as well, is likely more salient than often assumed, for example with respect to the notion of hypostasis as individual substance, first bodies, and apokatastasis. Thus, a reassessment of his thought permits us to revisit patristic philosophical theology and exegesis, as well as ancient philosophy. Yet, Origen seems to have spoken very little of himself; he was more typically spoken of—frequently in superlatives at both extremes. Most importantly, his presence is palpable in subsequent exegesis, theology, philosophical theology, and even ‘pagan’ philosophy. Unlike Augustine, Origen did not leave us an autobiography. This confessional reticence, which emerges time and again, might be taken as a sign of his humility—but mostly only seemingly. As we shall see, it is possible to identify many, mostly indirect, references to himself and his work in his extant oeuvre.