On First Principles, Volume I

«I know that very many of the brethren, driven by a desire for knowledge of the Scriptures, have requested of some scholars, experts in Greek letters, that they should make a Roman of Origen and present him to Latin ears.!» — abre el prefacio de Rufino, que es el primer texto del volumen: dice que muchos hermanos pidieron a peritos en letras griegas que hicieran romano a Orígenes y lo dieran a oídos latinos

«To this end also, when our brother and colleague, at the entreaty of Bishop Damasus, had translated two of the Homilies on the Song of Songs from Greek into Latin, he composed so elegant and splendid a preface to that work as to inspire a desire in everyone to read and avidly study Origen, saying that one could apply to his soul the saying, The King has brought me into his chamber; asserting that while he ‘in other works surpassed all other writers, in the Song of Songs he had surpassed even himself.’» — el antecedente que invoca sin nombrarlo: el hermano y colega que a ruego del papa Dámaso tradujo dos homilías sobre el Cantar y escribió un prefacio que encendía el deseo de leer a Orígenes

«He promises, indeed, in that same preface, that he himself will present the books on the Song of Songs and numerous others of Origen to Roman ears. But he, I see, finding greater pleasure in his own pen, pursues an end with greater glory, that he may be a ‘father of the word” rather than a translator.» — y el reproche velado que le hace: prometió dar a oídos romanos los libros sobre el Cantar y muchos otros, y prefirió su propia pluma, para ser padre de la palabra antes que traductor

«Accordingly we take up the work that was begun and approved of by him, although we are not able to provide such eloquent words as that great man. Therefore I am afraid lest, through my fault, that man, whom he has deservedly acknowledged as the other teacher of knowledge and wisdom in the Church after the apostles, should, through our own poverty of language, appear far inferior to what he is.» — cómo se sitúa Rufino respecto de él: retoma la obra que aquel empezó y aprobó, temiendo que por su pobreza de lenguaje aquel a quien reconoció como el segundo maestro de ciencia y sabiduría en la Iglesia después de los apóstoles parezca inferior a lo que es

«Continually thinking of this, I kept silent and did not yield to the brethren frequently entreating me to undertake this work. But your influence, most faithful brother Macarius, is so persuasive that not even lack of skill is able to withstand it.» — la resistencia que dice haber opuesto y quién la venció: la insistencia de Macario

«Because of this, that I might not find you too severe in your demands, I gave way, even against my resolution, yet on the agreement and arrangement, however, that in translating 1 would follow as far as possible the rule observed by my predecessors, and especially by that distinguished man whom I mentioned above.» — la condición con que cedió, y que es la que gobierna todo el texto que sigue: traducir siguiendo en lo posible la regla de sus predecesores y sobre todo la de aquel varón

«He, when translating into Latin more than seventy treatises, called Homilies, of Origen, and also a number of tomes on the writings of the Apostle, in which are found in the Greek a good many stumbling-blocks, so smoothed over and purified them all in his translation that a Latin reader» — en qué consistía esa regla, según la describe Rufino: al traducir más de setenta homilías y varios tomos sobre los escritos del Apóstol, aquel limó y purificó los tropiezos que el griego traía. La frase remata en la plana siguiente

«would find in them nothing that differs from our faith. His example, then, we follow to the best of our ability, if not with the same power of eloquence yet at least with the same rules of method, taking care not to reproduce those passages in the books of Origen which are found to be inconsistent or contrary to himself.» — y su remate, con la declaración de método: no reproducir los pasajes de los libros de Orígenes que se hallen inconsistentes o contrarios a él mismo

«The cause of these variations we have explained more fully in the Apology, which Pamphilus wrote in defence of the works of the same Origen, to which added a brief tract, in which we showed, I think, by clear proofs that his books have been corrupted in many places by heretics and malevolent persons,» — la causa que Rufino da a esas variaciones: que los libros han sido corrompidos en muchos lugares por herejes y malévolos, cosa que dice haber probado en un tratado añadido a la Apología de Pánfilo

«and especially those which you now request me to translate, that is Peri Archon, which may be rendered either On First Principles or On Principalities, and which are indeed for other reasons most obscure and very difÏcult. For here he discusses subjects concerning which philosophers, after spending their whole lives upon them, have been able to discover nothing.» — y la segunda dificultad, con las dos traducciones posibles del título que él mismo ofrece: sobre los primeros principios o sobre las principalidades, libros oscuros y difíciles porque tratan materias en que los filósofos nada hallaron tras dedicarles la vida

«But our author strives, as far as he possibly can, to turn to piety the faith in a Creator and the knowledge of creatures, which they had dragged down to impiety.» — lo que atribuye al propósito de Orígenes frente a esos filósofos: volver a la piedad la fe en un Creador y el conocimiento de las criaturas, que ellos habían arrastrado a la impiedad

«I have made these remarks in the preface, therefore, by way of precaution, lest slanderers should perhaps think that they have again discovered a pretext for accusation.» — por qué lo dice en el prefacio: por precaución, para que los calumniadores no crean haber hallado otra vez pretexto de acusación

«In the meantime, however, we have undertaken this heavy labour, with the aid of God by your prayers, not to shut the mouths of slanderers (for this is not possible, unless perhaps God should do it), but to provide material to those who desire to advance in the knowledge of realities.» — y para quién declara haber emprendido el trabajo: no para cerrar la boca a los calumniadores, cosa que tiene por imposible, sino para dar materia a quienes desean avanzar en el conocimiento de las realidades

«everyone who copies or reads these books, in the presence of God the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and by his belief in the kingdom to come, the mystery of the resurrection from the dead, and by that everlasting fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels,’ that, if he would not have for an eternal inheritance that place where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth? and where their fire is not quenched and their worm does not die? he neither add anything to this writing, nor take anything from it, nor insert anything, nor alter anything,» — el conjuro con que Rufino cierra su prefacio, dirigido a todo copista o lector, por el Padre, el Hijo y el Espíritu Santo, por el reino venidero, el misterio de la resurrección y el fuego eterno: que no añada, ni quite, ni inserte, ni altere nada

«but that he shall compare his copy with the exemplar from which he transcribed it and shall correct it to the letter and punctuate it, and not have an incorrect or unpunctuated manuscript, lest the difÏculty of ascertaining the sense, if the manuscript is not punctuated, should cause greater difÏculties to the readers.» — y la instrucción práctica que lo acompaña: cotejar la copia con el ejemplar, corregirla a la letra y puntuarla, porque un manuscrito sin puntuar dificulta averiguar el sentido

«they had dragged down to impiety. Wherever, therefore, we found in his writings anything contrary to that which he had himself elsewhere piously laid down regarding the Trinity, we have either omitted it, as being corrupt and interpolated,» — el procedimiento declarado, en el texto del cuerpo: lo hallado contrario a lo que el propio Orígenes asienta piadosamente sobre la Trinidad se omite por corrupto e interpolado. La introducción de Behr cita este mismo pasaje y ahí el troceo imprime *corrupt or interpolated*, divergencia que se consigna sin armonizar

«All’ who believe and are assured that grace and truth came through Jesus Christ? and who know Christ to be the truth, according to his saying, I am the truth? derive the knowledge which leads human beings to live a good and blessed life from no other source than from the very words and teaching of Christ.» — abre el prefacio de Orígenes: quienes creen que la gracia y la verdad vinieron por Jesucristo y saben que Cristo es la verdad no sacan de otra fuente que sus palabras y su enseñanza el conocimiento que lleva a vivir bien y felizmente

«And by the words of Christ we mean not only those which he spoke when he became human and dwelt in the flesh; for even before this, Christ, the Word of God, was in Moses and the prophets.» — y la extensión que da a esas palabras, que es una de las tesis que gobiernan la obra: no solo las dichas cuando se hizo hombre, porque antes ya el Verbo de Dios estaba en Moisés y en los profetas

«For without the Word of God how could they have been able to prophesy of Christ? In proof of this, it would not be difÏcult to show from the divine Scriptures how Moses or the prophets were filled with the Spirit of Christ in what they said and all that they did, were it not our purpose to confine the present work within the briefest possible limits.» — el argumento que aduce y el límite que se pone: sin el Verbo no habrían podido profetizar de Cristo, y no se detiene a probarlo por Escritura porque quiere ceñir la obra

«And therefore I think it sufÏcient to quote this one testimony of Paul from the epistle which he writes to the Hebrews, in which he says as follows, By faith Moses, when grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, choosing rather to be afÒicted with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season, considering abuse suffered for Christ greater riches than the treasures of the Egyptians.’» — el testimonio único con que lo cierra: el pasaje de Hebreos donde Moisés tuvo por mayor riqueza el oprobio sufrido por Cristo que los tesoros de Egipto

«And that he also spoke, after his ascension into heaven, in his apostles, is shown by Paul in this way, Or do you seek a proof of Christ who speaks in me?» — y la segunda mitad de la misma tesis: que también habló en sus apóstoles tras la ascensión, probado por la pregunta paulina sobre el Cristo que habla en él

«Since, however, many of those who profess to believe in Christ differ not only in small and trivial matters, but even on great and important matters— such as concerning God or the Lord Jesus Christ or the Holy Spirit, and not only regarding these but also regarding matters concerning created beings, that is, the dominions and the holy powers—because of this it seems necessary first of all to lay down a definite line and clear rule regarding each one of these matters, and then thereafter to investigate other matters.’» — el motivo declarado de la obra: como muchos de los que profesan creer en Cristo difieren no solo en cosas menudas sino en las grandes —Dios, Jesucristo, el Espíritu Santo, y también las dominaciones y potestades—, hace falta fijar primero una línea y una regla clara

«For just as, although many Greeks and barbarians promise the truth, we gave up seeking it from all who claimed it for false opinions after we had come to believe that Christ was the Son of God and were persuaded that we must learn it from him, so also, although there are many who think that they know what are the teachings of Christ, and not a few of them think differently from those before them, one must guard the ecclesiastical preaching,» — el paralelo con que lo justifica: así como se dejó de buscar la verdad en griegos y bárbaros al creer que Cristo es el Hijo de Dios, también entre los que creen saber lo que Cristo enseña hay que guardar la predicación eclesiástica

«Now it ought to be known that the holy apostles, in preaching the faith of Christ, delivered with utmost clarity to all believers, even to those who seemed somewhat dull in the investigation of divine knowledge, certain points that they believed to be necessary, leaving, however, the grounds of their statements to be inquired into by those who should merit the excellent gifts of the Spirit and especially by those who should receive from the Holy Spirit himself the grace of language, wisdom, and knowledge?» — la distinción de la que sale toda la arquitectura de la obra: los apóstoles entregaron con suma claridad ciertos puntos que tenían por necesarios, dejando las razones de esos enunciados a la indagación de quienes merezcan los dones del Espíritu

«while on other points they stated that things were so, keeping silence about how or whence they are, certainly so that the more diligent of their successors, being lovers of wisdom, those, I mean, who should prepare themselves to be worthy and capable of receiving wisdom, might have an exercise on which they might display the fruit of their ability.» — y el segundo miembro de esa distinción: sobre otros puntos solo afirmaron que las cosas son así, callando el cómo y el de dónde, para que los sucesores más diligentes tuvieran un ejercicio en que mostrar el fruto de su capacidad

«First, that ‘there is one God, who created and arranged all things; and who, when nothing existed, made all things;" he is God from the first creation and foundation of the world, the God of all the» — el primer punto de la lista, en el texto del cuerpo: un solo Dios que creó y dispuso todas las cosas y que, cuando nada existía, hizo todas las cosas. El tramo se corta en el cambio de plana

«just, of Adam, Abel, Seth, Enosh, Enoch, Noah, Sem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, the twelve patriarchs, Moses, and the prophets; and that this God in the last days," as he had announced beforehand by his prophets, sent our Lord Jesus Christ to call first Israel to himself and second the Gentiles,’* after the unfaithfulness of the people of Israel.» — la continuación de ese primer punto, con la lista de los justos y el envío de Cristo a llamar primero a Israel y después a los gentiles

«He assumed a body like to our own, differing in this respect only, that it was born of a virgin and of the Holy Spirit.*» — y la precisión sobre ese cuerpo: semejante al nuestro, distinto solo en haber nacido de una virgen y del Espíritu Santo

«And that this Jesus Christ was born and did suffer in truth, and not in appearance,’ and truly died our common death,? and did truly rise from the dead, and after the resurrection, having sojourned a while with his disciples, was taken up.» — el remate del segundo punto, dirigido contra quien tenga por aparente la carne: nació y padeció de verdad y no en apariencia, murió nuestra muerte común y resucitó de veras

«From which it follows, also, that we understand ourselves not to be subject to necessity, so as to be altogether compelled, even against our will, to do either good or evil."» — y lo que de ahí se sigue, que es la línea que Orígenes defenderá contra el fatalismo: no estamos sujetos a necesidad ni forzados contra nuestra voluntad a hacer el bien o el mal

«For if we possess free will, some powers perhaps may be able to urge us to sin, and others to help us to salvation;? we are not, however, compelled by necessity to act either rightly or wrongly, as those think who say that the course and movement of the stars are the cause of human actions, not only of those which take place outside the realm of free will, but also of those which are placed within our own power.» — la posición que fija frente a la astrología: unas potencias pueden urgir al pecado y otras ayudar a la salvación, pero no obliga la necesidad, como creen quienes hacen del curso y el movimiento de los astros la causa de los actos humanos

«But with respect to the soul, whether it is derived from the seed being transferred, so that the principle or substance of it may be held to be in the seminal particles of the body itself, or whether it has any other beginning, and this beginning itself, whether it is begotten or not begotten, or whether it is imparted to the body from without or not, is not explained with sufÏcient clarity in the preaching.?» — la abstención expresa sobre el origen del alma: si viene de la semilla transmitida o tiene otro principio, y si ese principio es engendrado o no engendrado, o le viene al cuerpo desde fuera, no se explica con claridad suficiente en la predicación

«This opinion, however, is held by most, that this devil was an angel, but having become an apostate he persuaded as many angels as possible to fall away with himself, and even until now these are called his angels.??» — la opinión que Orígenes atribuye a la mayoría sobre el diablo, sin hacerla punto de fe: que fue un ángel que, hecho apóstata, persuadió a cuantos ángeles pudo a caer con él

«For the things that are described [therein] are the forms of certain mysteries and images of divine things. There is one mind throughout the entire church about this, that the whole law is indeed spiritual,” yet that which the law conveys is not known by all but only by those on whom the grace of the Holy Spirit is bestowed in the word of wisdom and knowledge.» — el punto sobre la Escritura y su segundo sentido: lo descrito son formas de ciertos misterios e imágenes de lo divino, y toda la ley es espiritual, aunque no todos conocen lo que transmite

«The term ἀσώματος (that is, 'bodiless?) is unused and unknown not only in many other writings, but also in our own Scriptures.» — el excurso con que Orígenes cierra el prefacio, y que Behr liga con el final de la obra: el término incorpóreo no se usa ni se conoce en las propias Escrituras

«If anyone should quote it to us out of that pamphlet called The Teaching of Peter, where the Saviour is seen to say to his disciples, ‘I am not a bodiless daemonj» — la objeción que se plantea: que se le cite el opúsculo llamado la Enseñanza de Pedro, donde el Salvador dice a sus discípulos que no es un demonio incorpóreo. La cita se corta antes de la llamada a nota que el troceo deja pegada con dos asteriscos

«he must be answered, in the first place, that this work is not itself included among the ecclesiastical books, and it can be shown that it is not a writing of Peter nor of anyone else who was inspired by the Spirit of God.» — y su primera respuesta, que es un juicio de canon y de atribución: esa obra no está entre los libros eclesiásticos, y puede mostrarse que no es escrito de Pedro ni de otro inspirado

«But even if the point were conceded, the sense of the word ἀσώματος there does not indicate the same as that intended by Greek and pagan authors, when philosophers discuss bodiless nature.» — la segunda respuesta, concediendo lo anterior: aun así el sentido de la palabra allí no es el que le dan los autores griegos y paganos al discutir la naturaleza incorpórea

«Now, according to human custom, everything that is not such is called bodiless by the simple or uneducated, just as one says that the air we breathe is bodiless, because it is not a body that can be grasped and held or resist pressure.» — el cierre del excurso, con el ejemplo del habla común: los simples llaman incorpóreo al aire que respiramos porque no se puede asir ni resiste la presión

«This just and good God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,“ himself gave the law and the prophets and the Gospels, who is also the God of the apostles and of the Old and New Testaments.» — el cierre de ese primer punto, que es la afirmación antimarcionita de la lista: el mismo Dios justo y bueno, Padre de Jesucristo, dio la ley, los profetas y los Evangelios, y es el Dios de los apóstoles y de los dos Testamentos

«For in that pamphlet, he used the words ‘bodiless daemon’ to indicate that the form or outline of the daemonical body, whatever it is, is not like this dense and visible body of ours;» — el sentido que Orígenes da a esa expresión: que la forma del cuerpo demoníaco, sea cual sea, no es como este nuestro denso y visible

«We shall inquire, however, whether the actual thing which Greek philosophers call ἀσώματος (that is, ‘bodiless’) is found in the holy Scriptures under another name.» — el programa que Orígenes deja abierto al cerrar el prefacio: indagar si aquello que los filósofos griegos llaman incorpóreo se halla en las Escrituras con otro nombre

«For it is also to be investigated how God himself is to be understood, whether as bodily and formed according to some shape,” or of a different nature than bodies, a point which is not clearly indicated in our preaching.» — y la primera cuestión que declara pendiente, que será el asunto del capítulo siguiente: si Dios ha de entenderse como corpóreo y con alguna figura o de naturaleza distinta de los cuerpos

«The same is also to be investigated even regarding Christ and the Holy Spirit, and indeed it is to be investigated no less of every soul and every rational nature.» — y hasta dónde extiende esa misma indagación: a Cristo, al Espíritu Santo, a toda alma y a toda naturaleza racional

«Everyone, therefore, who desires to construct a certain structure and body of all these things, in accordance with reason, must make use of elements and foundations of this sort, according to the precept which says, Enlighten yourselves with the light of knowledge,?» — el encargo con que cierra el prefacio, con el precepto profético que lo manda: quien quiera construir una estructura y un cuerpo de todas estas cosas conforme a razón ha de usar tales elementos y fundamentos

«PART ONE: THEOLOGY I: The Apostolic Preaching» — la portadilla con que se abre la primera parte del volumen, que es la única impresa en este tomo: la teología, y dentro de ella el primer ciclo, la predicación apostólica

«I know that some will try to say that even according to our Scriptures God is a body, since they find it said in the writings of Moses, God is a consuming fire? and in the Gospel according to John, God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship him in spirit and truth? Fire and spirit, according to them, will be reckoned to be nothing other than a body.» — abre el capítulo sobre Dios con la posición que va a discutir: que Dios sea un cuerpo, porque la Escritura lo llama fuego consumidor y espíritu, y quienes lo dicen no tienen fuego ni espíritu por otra cosa que cuerpo

«I would like to ask them what they have to say about the saying, God is light, as John says in his epistle, God is light and in him there is no darkness.*» — la pregunta con que responde, tomando un tercer predicado del mismo tipo: qué dirán del dicho de Juan de que Dios es luz y no hay en él tiniebla

«He, indeed, is that light which illumines the whole understanding of those who are capable of receiving truth, as it is said in the thirty-fifth Psalm, In your light shall we see light.» — y el sentido en que él toma esa luz: la que ilumina todo el entendimiento de los capaces de recibir la verdad

«For what other light of God is being spoken of, in which one sees light, except the power of God by which someone, being illumined, either sees clearly the truth of all things or comes to know God himself, who is called the truth?» — el argumento que de ahí saca: la luz en que se ve luz no puede ser otra cosa que el poder de Dios por el que alguien, iluminado, ve la verdad de todas las cosas o conoce a Dios mismo

«Such, therefore, is the saying, In your light shall we see light, that is, in your Word and Wisdom, who is your Son, in him we shall see you, the Father.» — y la lectura trinitaria que le da: en tu Verbo y Sabiduría, que es tu Hijo, en él te veremos a ti, Padre

«Can it possibly be that, because he is called light, he shall be supposed to be like the light of the sun? Or how can there be even the slightest ground for thinking that from bodily light anyone could grasp the cause of knowledge and come to the understanding of truth?» — el argumento por absurdo con que cierra el punto: si se llama luz, ¿habrá de suponérsele semejante a la luz del sol, y cabe que de una luz corporal saque nadie la causa del conocimiento?

«If, then, they accept this assertion of ours, which is proved by reason itself, regarding the nature of light, and acknowledge that God cannot be understood to be a body in the sense that light is, similar reasoning will hold for the phrase, a consuming fire.’» — el paso siguiente: admitido lo de la luz, vale el mismo razonamiento para el fuego consumidor

«For what does God consume in respect of the fact that he is fire? Can he possibly be thought to consume bodily matter, wood or hay or stubble?® And what, in this, would be worthy of the praise of God, if God is a fire consuming materials of that kind?» — y la pregunta que lo decide: qué consume Dios en cuanto fuego, y qué habría de digno de alabanza en un Dios que consumiera madera, heno o rastrojo

«Let us rather consider that God does indeed consume and destroy, but that he consumes evil thoughts, he consumes wicked actions, he consumes the desires for sin, when they enter the minds of believers,» — la respuesta, que Behr subrayará en su introducción: Dios consume y destruye, pero lo que consume son los malos pensamientos, las acciones perversas y los deseos de pecar

«according to the saying, I and the Father shall come and make our abode with him, he makes them, after all their vices and passions have been consumed, into a temple pure and worthy of himself.'?» — y el fin de ese consumir: hacer del creyente, consumidos sus vicios y pasiones, templo puro y digno de sí mismo

«Those, moreover, who, because of the statement that God is spirit, think that he is a body, must be answered in this way. It is the custom of holy Scripture, when it wishes to designate anything of a contrary nature to this dense and solid body, to call it ‘spirit,» — cómo resuelve el tercer predicado: es costumbre de la Escritura llamar espíritu a lo de naturaleza contraria a este cuerpo denso y sólido

«Here there is no doubt that by ‘letter’ is meant bodily things, and by spirit intellectual things, which we also call ‘spiritual:» — y la equivalencia que fija con la sentencia paulina: por letra se entiende lo corporal y por espíritu lo intelectual

«For so long as someone has not turned to a spiritual understanding, a veil lies over his heart, by which veil that is, a duller understanding, Scripture itself is said or thought to be veiled; and this is what is meant by the veil placed over the countenance of Moses when he spoke to the people," that is, when the Law was publicly read aloud.» — la aplicación hermenéutica que saca del velo de Moisés: mientras no se vuelve uno a una comprensión espiritual, un velo yace sobre su corazón, y por ese velo, que es un entender más obtuso, se dice velada la Escritura misma

«But if we turn to the Lord, where also is the Word of God, and where the Holy Spirit reveals spiritual knowledge, then the veil is removed, and thus with an unveiled face we shall behold the glory of the Lord in the holy Scriptures.“» — y lo que ocurre al volverse al Señor: quitado el velo, con rostro descubierto se contempla la gloria del Señor en las santas Escrituras

«And although many saints participate in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit cannot on that account be thought of as a kind of body that, divided into bodily parts, is partaken of by each one of the saints; but he is rather a sanctifying power, in which all, who have deserved to be sanctified by his grace, are said to have a share.» — la objeción sobre el Espíritu Santo y su respuesta: participar de él no lo hace un cuerpo repartido en partes, porque es más bien un poder santificante del que participan cuantos merecen ser santificados

«And so that what we say may be more easily understood, let us take an illustration from things very dissimilar. There are many who take part in the sciences and art of medicine: are we to suppose that all those who participate in medicine have some body, called medicine, placed before them and remove particles [of it] for themselves and thus take a share in it? Must we not rather understand that all who with a quick and trained mind grasp the art and science itself may be said to participate in medicine?» — el símil con que lo explica: quienes participan de la medicina no reciben partículas de un cuerpo llamado medicina, sino que asen con mente pronta el arte y la ciencia misma

«We must now pass on to the word of the Gospel, where it is written that God is spirit," and must show that this is to be understood in conformity with what we have said. Let us inquire when our Saviour spoke these words, to whom, and what was being sought.» — el método con que aborda la sentencia evangélica: preguntar cuándo la dijo el Salvador, a quién y qué se buscaba

«We find, without any doubt, that he uttered them to the Samaritan woman, saying to her, who thought according to the belief of the Samaritans that God ought to be worshipped on Mount Gerizim, that God is spirit.» — la circunstancia que halla: la dijo a la samaritana, que tenía por debido adorar a Dios en el monte Garizín

«To this belief, then, of the Samaritan woman, who thought that because of the privileges of material places, God was less rightly or rightly worshipped either by the Jews in Jerusalem or by the Samaritans on Mount Gerizim, the Saviour answered that one who would follow God must refrain from all preference for material places,» — y lo que responde el Salvador según él: quien quiera seguir a Dios ha de abstenerse de toda preferencia por lugares materiales

«See also how appropriately he has associated truth with spirit: he called [God] spirit to distinguish him from bodies, and truth to distinguish him from a shadow or an image.» — la lectura fina que hace del par espíritu y verdad: lo llamó espíritu para distinguirlo de los cuerpos y verdad para distinguirlo de una sombra o una imagen

«For those who worshipped in Jerusalem, serving a shadow and image of heavenly things,? worshipped God neither in truth nor spirit; similarly also those who worshipped on Mount Gerizim.”!» — y la consecuencia que saca para los dos cultos: ni unos ni otros adoraban a Dios en verdad ni en espíritu

«Having refuted, then, as best we could, every notion which suggests that God be thought of in any bodily way, we assert that, according indeed to truth, God is incomprehensible and immeasurable.» — la tesis positiva a la que llega: Dios es incomprensible e inconmensurable. el verbo con que la obra describe lo hecho va dentro de la cita, no en esta glosa

«For whatever it is that we are able to sense or know of God, it is necessarily to be believed that he is by many degrees far better than what we perceive him to be.» — y la regla que de ahí saca: sea lo que sea lo que podamos sentir o saber de Dios, hay que creerlo con muchos grados mejor de lo que lo percibimos

«So also our mind, when shut in by the fetters of flesh and blood and rendered, by its participation in such materials, duller and more obtuse, although it is regarded as far more excellent in comparison with bodily nature, yet when it strives after bodiless things and searches for a glimpse of them, it scarcely has room for some spark or small lamp.» — y su aplicación: la mente, encerrada en las ataduras de carne y sangre y embotada por la participación en esa materia, apenas tiene sitio para una chispa cuando busca lo incorpóreo

«For what, among all intellectual, that is, bodiless beings, is so superior to all others, so unspeakably and immeasurably superior, as God, whose nature assuredly the vision of the human intellect is not able to grasp or see, however exceptionally pure or clear that intellect may be?» — y la pregunta con que cierra: qué hay entre todos los seres incorpóreos tan inefablemente superior como Dios, cuya naturaleza la visión del intelecto humano no alcanza a asir

«It will not seem absurd if we use another illustration to make the matter clearer still. Our eyes frequently cannot look at the nature of the light itself, that is, upon the substance of the sun; but when we see its brightness and rays pouring in through windows, perhaps, or any small opening for light, we can reflect about how great is the source and fountain of bodily light.» — el segundo símil: los ojos no pueden mirar la sustancia del sol, pero al ver sus rayos entrando por una ventana cabe pensar cuán grande es la fuente de la luz corporal

«So too the works of divine providence and the art of this universe are as if rays of the nature of God, in comparison with his own substance and being. Therefore because our own intellect is not able to behold God as he is, it understands the father of the universe from the beauty of his works and the comeliness of his creatures.”» — y su aplicación, que es la vía de conocimiento que Orígenes admite: las obras de la providencia y el arte de este universo son como rayos de la naturaleza de Dios, y por la hermosura de sus obras entiende el intelecto al padre del universo

«God, therefore, is not to be thought to be either a body or existing in a body, but to bea simple intellectual being, accepting in himself no addition whatever; so that he cannot be believed to have in himself a more or a less, but is, in all things, μονάς [unity], or, if I may say, évás [oneness],” and the intellectTM and source from which all intellectual being and intellect takes its beginning.» — la definición a la que llega el capítulo, con los dos términos griegos que la plana imprime: Dios no es cuerpo ni existe en un cuerpo, sino un ser intelectual simple que no admite añadido, unidad y aun unicidad, y el intelecto y la fuente de donde todo ser intelectual toma su principio

«Now an intellect, to move and operate, needs no bodily space, nor sensible magnitude, nor bodily shape or colour, nor does it need anything else whatever» — el argumento con que lo sostiene: un intelecto no necesita para moverse y obrar espacio corporal, magnitud sensible, figura ni color

«But these illustrations from medicine are not to be reckoned similar in every» — el límite que Orígenes pone a su propio símil; la frase se corta en el cambio de plana y remata diciendo que el Espíritu Santo es un ser intelectual que subsiste distintamente y la medicina no

«Just as, if we were to see someone scarcely able to bear a spark of light, or the light of a very small lamp, and if we» — el símil de la chispa y el sol con que lo ilustra; la frase se corta en el cambio de plana y sigue diciendo que a ese habría que hablarle del resplandor del sol

«of things proper to bodies or matter. Wherefore that simple and wholly intellectual being can have no delay or hesitation in its movements or operations, lest the simplicity of the divine nature should appear to be circumscribed or impeded somewhat by such an addition, and lest that which is the first principle of all things should be found to be composite and diverse, and to be many, not one; since the sole species of divinity, if I may speak thus, necessarily exists free from all bodily admixture.» — el argumento sobre la simplicidad divina, ya en la plana siguiente: ese ser simple y del todo intelectual no puede tener demora ni vacilación en sus movimientos, para que el principio primero de todas las cosas no resulte compuesto y múltiple

«Moreover, it is certain, even from the observation of our own intellect, that intellect does not need space to move according to its own nature. For if it abides within its own sphere, and nothing from any cause occurs to obstruct it, it will never be slowed down at all, by reason of difference in place, from performing its own movements; nor, on the other hand, does it gain any addition or increase of mobility from the quality of [particular] places.» — el apoyo que toma de la observación del propio intelecto: no necesita espacio para moverse según su naturaleza, ni gana movilidad por la cualidad de los lugares

«If anyone were to object, for example, that among those who sail and are tossed by the waves of the sea the intellect is somewhat less vigorous than is usual on land, it is believed that they suffer this not from the difference of place, but from the commotion or disturbance of the body to which the intellect is joined or attached.» — la objeción que se plantea y su respuesta: si en el mar el intelecto rinde menos, no es por la diferencia de lugar sino por la conmoción del cuerpo al que está unido

«For it seems contrary to nature, as it were, for a human body to live at sea, and, because of this, as if unequal to the task, the body appears to sustain the movements of the intellect in an irregular and disordered manner and to carry out its quick movements with a slower delivery, not less than those on land when they are in the grip of a fever, of whom it is certain that if the intellect fulfils its functions less effectively because of the strength of the fever, the cause is not to be found in any fault of place, but in the illness of the body, on account of which the body, disturbed and disordered, in no way renders to the intellect services customary under well-known and natural» — el desarrollo de esa respuesta, con el segundo ejemplo de la fiebre: no es falta del lugar sino enfermedad del cuerpo, que desordenado no presta al intelecto sus servicios acostumbrados

«being increased by bodily increments but by being honed through exercises in learning. Yet it cannot receive these immediately from boyhood or from birth, because the framework of limbs, which the intellect uses as instruments for its own exercises, is as yet weak and feeble, being neither able to bear the force of the mind's working nor sufÏciently developed to exhibit a capacity for receiving education.» — cómo explica que el intelecto no rinda desde la niñez: no crece por incrementos corporales sino afinándose con ejercicios de aprendizaje, y el armazón de miembros que usa como instrumentos es aún débil

«But if there are any who consider the intellect itself and the soul to be a body, I wish they would tell me how it can receive reasons and arguments on matters of such great importance, of such difÏculty and of such subtlety.» — la serie de preguntas con que responde a quien tenga por cuerpo al intelecto y al alma: cómo podría recibir razones y argumentos de tanta importancia, dificultad y sutileza

«Whence does the power of memory come to it, whence the contemplation of invisible things, and whence does the understanding of bodiless things reside in the body? How does a bodily nature investigate the disciplines of the arts and the meanings and reasons of things? Whence also is it able to perceive and understand the divine doctrines, which are manifestly bodiless?» — y el resto de esa serie: de dónde le viene la memoria, la contemplación de lo invisible, la comprensión de lo incorpóreo, la investigación de las artes y la percepción de las doctrinas divinas

«I do not know, however, who could describe or say what sort of appearance the intellect has, inasmuch as it is an intellect and moves in an intellectual manner.» — la abstención con que cierra el punto: no sabe quién podría describir qué apariencia tiene el intelecto en cuanto intelecto

«or perceived by means of a body is also itself a body; and they are unwilling for it to be understood that there is a certain afÏnity between the intellect and God,” of whom the intellect itself is an intellectual image, and that by means of this it is able to know to some degree the nature of divinity, especially if it is purified and separated from bodily matter.» — lo que Orígenes reprocha a esos adversarios, ya en la plana siguiente: no quieren admitir que hay cierta afinidad entre el intelecto y Dios, del que el intelecto es imagen intelectual, y que por ella puede conocer en algún grado la naturaleza divina

«But perhaps these assertions may seem to have less authority with those who wish to be instructed in divine things from the holy Scriptures, and who seek to have it proved to them from that source how the nature of God surpasses the nature of bodies.» — el cambio de terreno que hace por atención a otro tipo de lector: quienes quieren instruirse en lo divino desde las Escrituras y piden que se les pruebe desde ahí

«See, then, if the Apostle also does not say the same thing when, speaking of Christ, he says, Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature? Not, as some suppose, that the nature of God is visible to some and invisible to others; for the Apostle does not say ‘the image of God who is invisible to mer or ‘invisible to sinners, but pronounces, with absolute constancy, on the very nature of God, saying the image of the invisible God.» — la prueba escrituraria que da y el matiz que le saca: el Apóstol no dice imagen de Dios invisible para el hombre ni para los pecadores, sino que se pronuncia sobre la naturaleza misma de Dios

«And John, also, saying in the Gospel, No one has seen God at any time,” clearly declares to all who are able to understand that there is no being to which God is visible; not as if he were a being visible by nature and yet eludes and escapes the gaze of the frailer creatures, but because by nature it is impossible for him to be seen.» — y la segunda prueba, con su precisión: no es que Dios sea visible por naturaleza y escape a la mirada de las criaturas más frágiles, sino que por naturaleza le es imposible ser visto

«If you should ask of me what is my opinion regarding the only-begotten himself, whether I would say that the nature of God, which is naturally invisible, is not even visible to him, do not let this question immediately seem to you impious or absurd, for we shall of course give a reasonable answer."» — la pregunta atrevida que él mismo se pone, pidiendo que no se la tenga por impía: si esa naturaleza invisible es visible siquiera al unigénito

«It is one thing to see, and another to know; to see and to be seen is a property of bodies; to know and to be known is a property of intellectual beings.» — la distinción con que la resuelve, y que es una de las llaves del capítulo: ver y ser visto es propio de los cuerpos, conocer y ser conocido lo es de los seres intelectuales

«But if someone lays before us the question why it was said, Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God,” from that very passage, in my opinion, will our argument be much more firmly established; for what else is seeing God in the heart than, as we have explained above, to understand and to know him with the intellect??» — cómo lee la bienaventuranza de los limpios de corazón: ver a Dios en el corazón no es otra cosa que entenderlo y conocerlo con el intelecto

«For the names of the organs of sense are frequently applied to the soul, so that it may be said to see with the eyes of the heart, that is, to infer some intellectual conclusion by means of the faculty of intelligence.» — la regla hermenéutica que de ahí saca: los nombres de los órganos de los sentidos se aplican con frecuencia al alma, de modo que se dice que ve con los ojos del corazón

«So also it is said to hear with the ears when it perceives the deeper meaning. So also we say that it is able to use teeth, when it eats and consumes the bread of life which comes down from heaven.®» — y los otros dos ejemplos de esa transferencia: oír con los oídos cuando percibe el sentido más hondo, y usar dientes cuando come el pan de vida

«In a similar way it is said to use the services of the other members which are transferred from their bodily significance and applied to the faculties of the soul, just as Solomon says, You will find a divine sense?6» — el lugar de Salomón en que funda toda esa transferencia, que Behr recoge como clave de la obra entera

«For he knew that there were within us two kinds of senses: one kind of sense being mortal, corruptible, human, the other kind being immortal and intellectual, which he here calls divine.» — la doctrina de los dos sentidos que le atribuye: uno mortal, corruptible y humano, y otro inmortal e intelectual, que llama divino

«Having understood, therefore, the nature of God, in a manner greatly inferior to what is fitting, because of the weakness of human intelligence, let us now see what is meant by the name of Christ.» — la fórmula de tránsito con que cierra el capítulo sobre Dios, con su reserva: entendida la naturaleza de Dios muy por debajo de lo que corresponde, por la debilidad de la inteligencia humana

«As such, we must first see what the only-begotten Son of God is, who is called by many and diverse names according to the circumstances and beliefs of those speaking.’» — el método del capítulo: ver primero qué es el Hijo unigénito, al que se llama con muchos y diversos nombres según las circunstancias y las creencias de quienes hablan

«For he is called Wisdom, as Solomon said, speaking in the person of Wisdom: The Lord created me the beginning of his ways for his works; before he made anything, before the ages, he established me. In the beginning, before he made the earth, before the springs of water came forth, before the mountains were made firm, before all the hills, he begets me?» — el primer nombre, la Sabiduría, con el pasaje de Proverbios que lo sostiene y que será el centro de toda la discusión sobre la creación

«He is also called the First-born, as the Apostle Paul says, Who is the First-born of all creation.’ The First-born is not, however, by nature another than Wisdom, but is one and the same.» — el segundo nombre, el Primogénito, con la advertencia de que no es otro por naturaleza que la Sabiduría sino uno y el mismo

«Let no one, however, suppose that when we call him the Wisdom of God, we mean something unsubstantial? that is, to take an example, that we understand him to be not, as it were, some wise living being, but rather a certain thing which makes [others] wise, offering and implanting itself in the intellects of those who are made capable of receiving his virtues and intelligence.» — la precisión que ataja el malentendido principal: al llamarlo Sabiduría de Dios no se entiende algo insustancial, como una cosa que hace sabios a otros sin ser ella un viviente sabio

«If, then, once it is rightly understood that the only-begotten Son of God is his Wisdom subsisting substantially,’ I do not think that our mind now ought to stray beyond this to the suspicion that his very ὑπόστασις (that is, subsistence?) might have something bodily, since everything that is bodily is distinguished by shape or colour or size.» — y lo que de ahí se sigue, con el término griego que la plana imprime: entendido que el unigénito es su Sabiduría subsistiendo sustancialmente, no cabe sospechar que esa subsistencia tenga algo corpóreo

«And who in his sound mind ever sought for shape or colour or measurable size in wisdom, inasmuch as it is wisdom?» — la pregunta con que lo cierra: quién en su sano juicio buscó jamás figura, color o tamaño en la sabiduría en cuanto sabiduría

«Therefore we acknowledge that God is always the Father of his only-begotten Son, who was indeed born of him, and derives from him what he is, but without, however, any beginning, not only that which may be distinguished by periods of time, but even that which intellect alone is accustomed to contemplate within itself or to contemplate, if we may thus speak, with the bare intellect and reason.» — la tesis que de ahí saca, que es la de la generación eterna: Dios es siempre Padre de su Hijo unigénito, nacido de él y que de él deriva lo que es, sin principio alguno, ni distinguible por periodos de tiempo ni contemplable por el solo intelecto

«Wisdom is thus believed to be begotten beyond the limits of any beginning that we can speak of or understand.» — y su formulación más apretada: la Sabiduría es engendrada más allá de los límites de todo principio que podamos decir o entender

«Now, in the same way in which we have understood that Wisdom is the beginning of the ways of God, and is said to be created, that is, forming beforehand and containing within herself the species and reasons of the whole creation, in the same manner must she be understood to be the Word of God, as she discloses to all other beings, that is, to the entire creation, the reason of the mysteries and secrets which are contained within the Wisdom of God, and so she is called the Word, beca» — el tercer nombre y su razón: así como la Sabiduría contiene de antemano las especies y razones de toda la creación, ha de entenderse Verbo en cuanto descubre a toda la creación la razón de los misterios contenidos en la Sabiduría de Dios

«By this divine sense, therefore, not of the eyes, but of a pure heart, which is the intellect, God» — la conclusión del capítulo: por ese sentido divino, no el de los ojos sino el del corazón puro, que es el intelecto, puede ser visto Dios por los dignos

«And how can one, who has learnt to know and think piously about God, think or believe that the God and Father ever» — el dilema que plantea a quien suponga un antes del engendramiento de la Sabiduría; la frase se corta en el cambio de plana

«Wisdom before he begot her, so that afterwards he begot into being her who formerly did not exist, or else that he was able but, what is impious even to say about God, unwilling to beget; both alternatives, as is patent to all, are absurd and impious, that is, either that God advanced from a condition of being unable to being able, or that, while being able, he hid this and delayed the begetting of Wisdom.» — y su remate: o Dios pasó de no poder a poder, o pudiendo retrasó el engendrar la Sabiduría, y las dos cosas las tiene por absurdas e impías

«always father and that he begot the Word and possessed Wisdom in all previous times or ages, or whatever else one can call them.» — el remate de la generación eterna, ya en la plana siguiente: siempre padre, engendró el Verbo y poseyó la Sabiduría en todos los tiempos o edades anteriores

«This Son, therefore, is also the truth and the life of all things which exist,’ and rightly so. For how could things that were created live, except by life?’ Or how could those things that are truly exist, unless they were derived from the truth? Or how could rational beings exist, unless the Word or Reason preceded them?" Or how could they be wise, unless there was Wisdom?» — la cadena de preguntas con que Orígenes deriva los títulos del Hijo: cómo vivirían las cosas creadas sino por la vida, cómo existirían de verdad sino por la verdad, cómo habría racionales sin el Verbo o Razón, y sabios sin la Sabiduría

«But since it was to come to pass that some should also fall away from life, and bring death upon themselves by this very act of falling away from life (for death is nothing else than a departure from life), and since it was not to follow that those, who had once been created by God to live, 5 should utterly perish, it was necessary that, before death, there should be such a power that would destroy the death that was to come and be the resurrection,! the figure of which is in our Lord and Saviour, which resurrection exists in the Wisdom and Word and Life of God.» — cómo deriva el título de resurrección: como algunos habían de caer de la vida y traerse la muerte, y no convenía que perecieran del todo los creados para vivir, hacía falta antes de la muerte un poder que la destruyera y fuera la resurrección

«Then, in next place, since it was to come to pass that some of those who were created, possessing the good not by nature, that is, substantially, but by accident, would not be able to remain unchangeable and unalterable and to abide always in the same blessings with equilibrium and moderate measure, but, turning and changing, would fall away from their condition, the Word and Wisdom of God became the way." She is called the way because she leads to the Father those who walk along her.» — y cómo deriva el título de camino: como los creados poseen el bien por accidente y no sustancialmente, y podían cambiar y caer, el Verbo y la Sabiduría se hizo camino, que se llama así porque lleva al Padre a los que andan por ella

«Whatever, therefore, we have said of the Wisdom of God will appropriately be applied and understood also in the case of saying that the Son of God is the life and that he is the word and that he is the way and that he is the truth, and that he is the resurrection; for all these titles are named from his works and» — la regla que fija para todos los títulos: lo dicho de la Sabiduría vale para la vida, el verbo, el camino, la verdad y la resurrección, porque todos esos nombres se toman de sus obras

«how the unbegotten God becomes Father of the only-begotten Son. For this is an eternal and everlasting begetting, just as brightness is begotten from light.’ For he does not become Son, in an external manner, through adoption in the Spirit,? but is Son by nature.» — la comparación con que explica esa paternidad, ya en la plana siguiente: es un engendrar eterno y perpetuo, como el resplandor se engendra de la luz, y no se hace Hijo desde fuera por adopción en el Espíritu sino que lo es por naturaleza

«Let us now see how what we have said is also supported by the authority of the divine Scripture. The Apostle Paul says that the only-begotten Son is the image of the invisible God and the first-born of all creation;? and when writing to the Hebrews, he says of him that he is the splendour of the glory and the express figure of his substance."» — el paso a la prueba escrituraria, con los dos lugares paulinos: imagen del Dios invisible y primogénito de toda la creación, y resplandor de la gloria y figura expresa de su sustancia

«Nevertheless, we also find in the book of Wisdom, which is said to be Solomon's,? a certain description of the Wisdom of God written in this way, For she is the breath of the power of God, and the ἀπόρροια, (that is, emanation) of the purest glory of the Almighty; for that reason, therefore nothing defiled can enter into her. For she is the radiance of eternal life and the flawless mirror of the working of God and the image of his goodness.?» — el tercer lugar, del libro de la Sabiduría, con el término griego que la plana conserva y su glosa latina: aliento del poder de Dios y emanación de la gloria purísima del Todopoderoso, resplandor de la vida eterna, espejo sin mancha de la operación de Dios e imagen de su bondad

«Now we hold, as we said above, that the Wisdom of God has her subsistence nowhere else but in him who is the beginning of all things, from whom also she is born. Since this Wisdom is the one who alone is Son by nature, she is therefore called the only-begotten.» — y la conclusión que saca: la Sabiduría no tiene su subsistencia en otro sitio que en aquel que es el principio de todas las cosas, y por ser la única Hija por naturaleza se la llama unigénita

«Let us now see what ought to be understood when he is called the image of the invisible God, so that by this we might perceive how God is rightly called the Father of his Son; and let us first of all consider things which are customarily called ‘images’ by human beings.» — el método con que aborda el título de imagen: considerar primero qué llaman los hombres imagen

«That which is painted or sculpted on some material, such as wood or stone, is sometimes called an image; and sometimes a child is called the image of its parent, when the likeness of the features of the parent are in no way distorted in the child.» — los dos sentidos ordinarios que distingue: lo pintado o esculpido en madera o piedra, y el hijo como imagen del padre cuando los rasgos no quedan desfigurados en él

«invisible God,”° just as, according to the narrative, we say the image of Adam is his son Seth. For it is written thus, And Adam begot Seth in his own image and in his own form.”» — el sentido que escoge, ya en la plana siguiente, con el ejemplo escriturario de Set como imagen de Adán

«This image preserves the unity of nature and substance of a father and of a son. For if all that the Father does, the Son also does likewise,” then by the fact that the Son does all things like the Father, the image of the Father is formed in the Son, who is assuredly born of him, as an act of his will proceeding from the intellect."» — lo que ese sentido preserva y de dónde saca el modo del engendrar: la unidad de naturaleza y sustancia entre padre e hijo, y el Hijo nacido como un acto de la voluntad que procede del intelecto

«And therefore I consider that the will of the Father ought to be sufÏcient for the subsistence of what he wills; for in willing he uses no other means than that which is produced by the counsel of his will. In this way, then, the subsistence of the Son is also begotten by him.» — la razón que da: la voluntad del Padre basta para la subsistencia de lo que quiere, porque al querer no usa otro medio que el consejo de su voluntad

«This point must, above all, be upheld by those who acknowledge nothing to be unbegotten, that is, unborn, except the God and Father.?» — la guarda que impone a esa doctrina: sostenerla sobre todo quienes no reconocen nada no engendrado sino al Dios y Padre

«One must, moreover, be careful not to fall into the absurd fables of those who depict for themselves certain emanations, so as to divide the divine nature into parts and divide the God and Father as far as they can, since even to entertain the slightest suspicion of this regarding a bodiless being is not only of extreme impiety but also of ultimate folly,» — y la segunda guarda, que marca su frente polémico: no caer en las fábulas absurdas de quienes se imaginan ciertas emanaciones y dividen así en partes la naturaleza divina

«Rather, then, as an act of the will proceeds from the intellect, and neither cuts off any part nor is separated or divided from it, so, in some similar fashion, is the Father to be supposed to have begotten the Son, that is, his own image, so that just as he is himself invisible by nature, so also he has begotten an image that is invisible.» — el modelo que pone en su lugar: como el acto de la voluntad procede del intelecto sin cortar parte alguna ni separarse de él, así engendró el Padre al Hijo, imagen suya, invisible como él

«For the Son is the Word, and therefore it is understood that nothing in him is perceptible to the senses; he is Wisdom, and in Wisd» — la prueba de esa invisibilidad por los títulos: siendo Verbo, nada hay en él perceptible a los sentidos; siendo Sabiduría, tampoco

«in relation to the Father himself, the truth, and in relation to us, to whom he revealed the Father, the image," by which we come to the knowledge of the Father, whom no one else knows except the Son and he to whom the Son has willed to reveal him.?» — el reparto de títulos según el término de la relación, ya en la plana siguiente: verdad respecto del Padre mismo, e imagen respecto de nosotros, a quienes reveló al Padre

«And he reveals him by being himself understood.» — y cómo se ejerce esa revelación: la revela siendo él mismo entendido, porque quien entiende al Hijo entiende también al Padre. La llamada a nota que el troceo deja pegada con dos asteriscos queda fuera de la cita, y el tramo sigue en la línea siguiente

«For to the one who has understood the Son himself, the Father is also understood, according to his own words, He that has seen me, has seen the Father also.^^» — continuación del mismo pasaje al otro lado de esa llamada a nota

«But since we quoted the saying of Paul regarding Christ, in which he says of him that he is the splendour of the glory of God and the express figure of his substance; let us see what we are to learn from this. God is light, according to John.” The only-begotten Son, therefore, is the splendour of this light, proceeding from him inseparably as does splendour from light, and enlightening the whole creation.’» — el título de resplandor y su explicación: siendo Dios luz, el unigénito es el resplandor de esa luz, que procede de él inseparablemente e ilumina a toda la creación

«This splendour, presenting itself softly and gently to the frail and weak eyes of mortals, and gradually training, as it were, and accustoming them to bear the brightness of the light, when it has removed from them everything that clouds and impedes vision, according to the Lord's saying, Cast out the beam from your own eye,? renders them capable of receiving the splendour of the light, even becoming in this respect a kind of mediator between human beings and the light.”» — la función pedagógica que atribuye a ese resplandor: se presenta suave a los ojos frágiles de los mortales y los acostumbra a soportar el brillo de la luz, con lo que viene a ser mediador entre los hombres y la luz

«But since he is called by the Apostle not only the splendour of the glory but also the express figure of his substance or subsistence, it doesn't seem to me idle to turn our intellect to the issue of how there can be said to be, besides the substance or subsistence of God himself, whatever that substance or subsistence means, another figure of his substance.» — la cuestión que abre el título de figura expresa: cómo puede haber, además de la sustancia de Dios mismo, otra figura de su sustancia

«Consider, then, whether the Son of God—who is also called his Word and Wisdom and alone knows the Father and reveals him to whom he will, to those, that is, who become capable of receiving his Word and Wisdom—may not, in regard to this very point of making God to be understood and known, be called the figure of his substance or subsistence; that is, when Wisdom outlines in herself, first of all, the things which she wishes to reveal to others, by which God may be known and understood by them, then she may also be called the express figure of the substance of God.» — la respuesta que ensaya: en cuanto la Sabiduría delinea en sí misma lo que quiere revelar a otros, por lo cual Dios puede ser conocido y entendido, puede llamársela figura expresa de la sustancia de Dios

«In order, however, that it may be more fully understood in what way the Saviour is the figure of the substance or subsistence of God, let us use an example, which, although it does not fully or properly represent the subject we are treating, may yet be taken, solely so that it may be seen that when the Son, who was in the form of God, emptied himself," he desires to demonstrate, by this very emptying, the fullness of divinity.”» — la advertencia que antepone al ejemplo siguiente y lo que quiere mostrar con él: que el Hijo, estando en forma de Dios, muestra por ese mismo vaciarse la plenitud de la divinidad

«For example,” suppose there were a statue of such magnitude as to fill the whole world and on that account could be seen by no one; but that another statue was made similar to it in every respect, in the shape of limbs and outline of countenance, in form and matter, but not in its immensity of size, so that those who were unable to perceive and behold the immense one, on seeing the latter could be assured that they had seen the former, because it preserved every outline of limb and countenance, and even the for» — el ejemplo de las dos estatuas: una de tal magnitud que llena el mundo entero y por eso nadie la ve, y otra igual en todo salvo en el tamaño, de modo que quienes no podían percibir la inmensa quedaran seguros de haberla visto

«and, I and the Father are one, with which is also to be understood the similar saying, that The Father is in me, and I in the Father.“» — las dos sentencias joánicas con que cierra el ejemplo, ya en la plana siguiente

«Let us now see what is the meaning of the passage we find written in the Wisdom of Solomon, where it is said of Wisdom that, She is a breath of the power of God, and the ἀπόρροια (that is, the emanation") of the purest glory of the Almighty and the splendour of eternal light and the flawless mirror of the working of God and the image of his goodness.» — el pasaje del libro de la Sabiduría que se dispone a desmenuzar término por término

«Determining here, then, five points regarding God, from each of them he points out a certain characteristic of the Wisdom of God: for he speaks of the power, and the glory, and the eternal light, and the working, and the goodness of God.» — los cinco puntos sobre Dios que halla en él: el poder, la gloria, la luz eterna, la operación y la bondad

«He says, however, that Wisdom is a breath not of the glory of the Almighty, nor of the eternal light, nor of the working of the Father, nor of his goodness, for it was not appropriate that breath should be ascribed to any of these; but, with all propriety, he says that Wisdom is a breath of the power of God.”» — la observación fina que hace sobre el reparto: se dice aliento del poder y no de la gloria, ni de la luz eterna, ni de la operación, ni de la bondad, porque a ninguna de esas convenía atribuir aliento

«Now, the power of God must be understood as that by which he is strong, that by which he establishes, preserves, and governs all things visible and invisible, and that by which he is sufÏcient for all things, for whom he exercises his providence and with whom he is present, as if united with them.» — cómo define entonces el poder de Dios: aquello por lo que es fuerte, por lo que asienta, conserva y gobierna todo lo visible e invisible, y por lo que basta a todas las cosas

«The breath, then, or if I may speak thus, the vigour of all this great and so immense power itself comes to have its own subsistence, for although it proceeds from the power itself as will from the intellect, nevertheless even the will of God itself becomes the power of God.» — y qué es ese aliento: el vigor de ese poder inmenso, que llega a tener subsistencia propia, porque procede del poder como la voluntad del intelecto y la voluntad misma de Dios se hace poder de Dios

«Another power, therefore, comes to be, subsisting in its own properties, a kind of breath, as the passage of Scripture afÏrms, of the first and unbegotten power of God, drawing from him whatever it is.» — la conclusión: viene a ser otro poder, subsistente en sus propias propiedades, aliento del primer poder no engendrado, del que saca cuanto es. La cita se corta antes de la llamada a nota que el troceo deja pegada con dos asteriscos

«always existed, having no beginning but God himself. Nor indeed was it fitting that there should be any other beginning, but God himself, from whom it is and is born. According to the saying of the Apostle, that Christ is the power of God, it should be called not only the breath of the power of God, but power from power,» — el remate de ese argumento, ya en la plana siguiente: ese aliento existió siempre, sin más principio que Dios mismo, y ha de llamarse no solo aliento del poder de Dios sino poder de poder

«Let us now examine the saying that [Wisdom] is the ἀπόρροια (that is, the emanation) of the purest glory of the Almighty, and let us first consider what the glory of the Almighty is, and then we shall understand what is its emanation.» — el orden que se impone para el segundo término: primero qué sea la gloria del Todopoderoso, y de ahí qué sea su emanación

«In?! the same way that no one can be a father if there is no son, nor can one be a lord if he owns neither possessions nor a slave, so even God cannot be called Almighty' if there are not those over whom he can exercise his power; and, therefore, that God may be shown to be almighty, it is necessary that all things exist.» — la analogía que ha hecho célebre este pasaje y que dará pie al cargo de una creación eterna: como no hay padre sin hijo ni señor sin posesiones ni siervo, tampoco cabe llamar todopoderoso a Dios si no hay aquello sobre lo que ejerce su poder

«For if anyone would have it that some ages or periods, or whatever else he likes to call them, passed away, ages when those things that have been made had not yet been made, he would undoubtedly prove that during those ages or periods God was not almighty but became almighty afterwards, from the time when he began to have those over whom he could exercise power; and in this way he will appear to have received a certain increase and to have come from a lower to a higher state,» — y el absurdo que le opone a quien ponga edades anteriores a las cosas hechas: Dios no habría sido todopoderoso y lo habría llegado a ser después, recibiendo un aumento y pasando de un estado inferior a uno superior

«And how would it not seem absurd that God, not having something of those things fitting for him to have, should afterwards, by a kind of progress, come to have it?» — la pregunta con que lo remata, ya en la plana siguiente: cuán absurdo parecería que Dios, no teniendo algo que le conviene tener, llegara después a tenerlo por una especie de progreso

«But since it says that the glory is of the Almighty, of which glory Wisdom is the emanation, this is given to be understood, that Wisdom, through which God is called Almighty, has a share even in the glory of omnipotence. For through Wisdom, who is Christ, God holds power over all things, not only by the authority of having dominion, but also the voluntary obedience of his subjects.» — lo que Orígenes saca de que la gloria sea del Todopoderoso: que la Sabiduría participa de la gloria de la omnipotencia, porque por ella, que es Cristo, tiene Dios poder sobre todo, no solo por autoridad de dominio sino por obediencia voluntaria de los súbditos

«In the third place, Wisdom is said to be the splendour of eternal light; the force of this expression we have explained in the preceding pages, when we introduced the illustration ofthe sun and the splendour of its rays, and showed, to the best of our power, how this should be understood.» — el tercero de los cinco términos, el resplandor de la luz eterna, remitido al símil del sol ya expuesto

«We shall add, however, this one point. That which neither had a beginning of existence, nor can ever cease to be what it is, is properly called everlasting or eternal.» — la definición que añade: propiamente se llama sempiterno o eterno lo que ni tuvo principio de existencia ni puede dejar de ser lo que es

«And this is pointed out by John when he says, God is light. Now his Wisdom is the splendour of that light, not only in respect of its being light, but also in respect of its being everlasting light, so that his Wisdom is eternal and everlasting splendour.» — y su aplicación: la Sabiduría es resplandor de esa luz no solo en cuanto luz sino en cuanto luz sempiterna, de modo que es resplandor eterno y sempiterno

«If this be fully understood, it clearly shows that the subsistence of the Son derives from the Father himself, yet not temporally nor from any other beginning except, as we have said, from God himself.» — lo que de ahí se sigue para la subsistencia del Hijo: deriva del Padre mismo, no temporalmente ni desde otro principio

«But Wisdom is also termed the flawless mirror of the évepyeia. (that is, the working) of God. It must first be understood, then, what the working of the power of God is. It is a kind of strength, if we may speak thus, by which the Father works, either when he creates or when he acts in providence, or judges, or when he arranges and orders individual things, each in its own time.» — el cuarto término, el espejo sin mancha de la operación de Dios, y qué entiende por esa operación: la fuerza por la que el Padre obra al crear, al proveer, al juzgar y al ordenar cada cosa en su tiempo. El troceo corrompe la palabra griega

«For as in a mirror the image formed in the mirror moves along or acts with all the same motions and actions with which the one who looks into the mirror moves or acts, and deviates from them in absolutely nothing, even so Wisdom is to be understood concerning herself, when she names herself the flawless mirror of the paternal power and working;» — el símil del espejo con que lo explica: la imagen se mueve y obra con los mismos movimientos del que mira, sin desviarse en nada

«just as the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Wisdom of God, declares about himself when he says, The works which the Father does, these the Son does likewise.” And again he says, the Son can do nothing of himself except what h» — y las dos sentencias joánicas con que lo cierra: las obras que hace el Padre las hace igualmente el Hijo, y el Hijo nada puede hacer por sí

«It remains to inquire what the image of his goodness is. In this, I think, the same thing must be understood as we expressed above in regard to the image formed by the mirror. For the Father is, without doubt, the primal goodness, from which the Son is born, who, being in every respect the image of the Father, may doubtless be properly called the image of his goodness.“» — el quinto y último término: el Padre es sin duda la bondad primera de la que nace el Hijo, que por ser en todo imagen del Padre puede llamarse con propiedad imagen de su bondad

«For there is no other second goodness existing in the Son, besides that which is in the Father. And therefore the Saviour himself rightly says in the Gospel, No one is good but one, the God and Father, that by this it may be understood that the Son is not of some other goodness, but of that only which is in the Father, of whom he is rightly called the image, because neither is he of any other source but from that primal goodness, so that there is not seen in the Son another goodness than that which is in the Father, nor is there any dissimilarity or difference of goodness in the Son.» — la razón que da y el uso que hace de la sentencia evangélica: no hay en el Hijo una segunda bondad distinta de la que está en el Padre, ni desemejanza ni diferencia de bondad

«And therefore it is not to be imagined that there is some kind of blasphemy, as it were, in the words, No one is good but one, the God and Father, as if, on that account, it be supposed to be denied that either Christ or the Holy Spirit is good;» — la lectura que ataja: no hay blasfemia en decir que nadie es bueno sino uno, ni con ello se niega que Cristo o el Espíritu Santo sean buenos

«but, as we have said above, the primal goodness is recognized in the God and Father, from whom both the Son, being begotten, and the Holy Spirit, proceeding, without doubt draw into themselves the nature of that goodness, which exists in the source, from whom the Son is born and the Spirit proceeds.» — y la posición que sostiene: la bondad primera se reconoce en el Dios y Padre, de quien el Hijo engendrado y el Espíritu procedente sacan a sí la naturaleza de esa bondad

«But if there are any other things called good in the Scriptures, whether angel, or human, or servant, or treasure, or a good heart, or a good tree, all these are called thus inexactly, having in them an accidental, not an essential, goodness.» — y la distinción con que cierra el capítulo: si la Escritura llama buenos a un ángel, a un hombre, a un siervo, a un tesoro, a un corazón o a un árbol, todos se llaman así de modo inexacto, por bondad accidental y no esencial

«But it would be a large undertaking, for another work and another time, to collect all the titles of the Son of God, for exa» — la deuda que él mismo declara y aplaza: recoger todos los títulos del Hijo de Dios sería empresa grande, de otra obra y otro tiempo

«Following on, then, we must now investigate as briefly as we are able the subject of the Holy Spirit. All who perceive, in whatever way, the existence of providence, confess that God, who created and arranged all things, is unbegotten and confess him as the Father of the universe.!» — abre el capítulo sobre el Espíritu Santo situando el punto de partida común: cuantos perciben de algún modo la providencia confiesan que Dios, que creó y dispuso todo, es no engendrado y Padre del universo

«That he has a Son is not only declared by us; although this may seem sufÏciently strange and incredible to those considered philosophers among the Greeks and barbarians, yet the belief in him seems to have been held by some even of them, in their acknowledging that all things were created by the word or reason of God.’» — y el segundo escalón, con la concesión que hace a los de fuera: que tenga un Hijo parece extraño a los tenidos por filósofos entre griegos y bárbaros, y sin embargo algunos de ellos lo sostuvieron al reconocer que todo fue creado por el verbo o razón de Dios

«We, however, by faith in that teaching which we hold for certain to be divinely inspired, believe that it is possible in no other way to explain and to bring to human knowledge a higher and more divine teaching regarding the Son than by means of those Scriptures alone which were inspired by the Holy Spirit, that is, the evangelical and apostolic Scriptures and also, according to the statement of Christ himself, those of the law and the prophets.’» — el criterio que fija para el Hijo: no cabe otro modo de llevar al conocimiento humano una enseñanza más alta sobre él que las Escrituras inspiradas, las evangélicas y apostólicas y también la ley y los profetas

«But of the subsistence of the Holy Spirit, no one could have even a suspicion, except those who were familiar with the law and the prophets, or those who profess a belief in Christ.» — y el corte que hace para el Espíritu Santo, que es la tesis del capítulo: de su subsistencia nadie podría siquiera sospechar salvo quienes conocen la ley y los profetas o profesan fe en Cristo

«For although no one is able to speak worthily of God the Father, it is nevertheless possible to gain some notion of him from the fact of the visible creation and from those things which the human mind naturally perceives; and it is possible, moreover, for this to be confirmed from the holy Scriptures.?» — la gradación con que lo sostiene, primer escalón: del Padre, aunque nadie hable dignamente, cabe hacerse alguna noción por la creación visible y por lo que la mente percibe naturalmente

«But regarding the Son of God, although no one knows the Son except the Fatheró however it is again from the holy Scriptures that the human mind is taught how it ought to think of him too; not only from the New, but also from the Old Testament, through those things which, though done by the saints, are figurati» — y el segundo escalón: del Hijo enseña la Escritura cómo ha de pensarse, y no solo el Nuevo Testamento sino también el Antiguo por lo que los santos hicieron en figura

«in the New Testament we are taught by abundant testimonies, as when the Holy Spirit is related to have descended upon Christ? and when the Lord himself breathed upon the apostles after the resurrection, saying, Receive the Holy Spirit," and to Mary it is said by the angel, The Holy Spirit shall come upon you," and Paul teaches that No one can say that Jesus is the Lord except in the Holy Spirit,? and, in the Acts of the Apostles, through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given in baptism.?» — los testimonios neotestamentarios que reúne sobre el Espíritu Santo: el descenso sobre Cristo, el aliento sobre los apóstoles, el anuncio a María, la sentencia paulina y la imposición de manos en el bautismo

«From all of which we learn that the substance of the Holy Spirit was of such authority and dignity that saving baptism is not complete except by the authority of the most excellent of all, the Trinity," that is, by the naming of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, ^ and that the name of the Holy Spirit is also joined to the unbegotten God the Father and to his only-begotten Son.» — lo que de ahí concluye sobre su dignidad: el bautismo salvador no se completa sino por la autoridad de la Trinidad, nombrando al Padre, al Hijo y al Espíritu Santo

«Who, then, is not amazed at the greatness of the majesty of the Holy Spirit, when he hears that he who shall speak a word against the Son of man may hope for forgiveness, but he who shall blaspheme the Holy Spirit shall have no forgiveness, neither in the present world nor in that to come?'» — y el segundo argumento, tomado de la sentencia sobre la blasfemia: quien hable contra el Hijo del hombre puede esperar perdón, y quien blasfeme contra el Espíritu Santo no lo tendrá

«That all things were created by God and that there is no being that exists which has not received its existence from him is established from many declarations throughout the whole of Scripture, while those claims falsely advanced by some regarding matter coeternal with God or unbegotten souls, in which they would have it that God implanted not so much existence but quality and order of life, are refuted and rejected.» — la tesis con que abre el punto siguiente y las dos posiciones que nombra como rechazadas: la materia coeterna con Dios y las almas no engendradas a las que Dios solo daría cualidad y orden de vida

«For even in that little book called The Shepherd or The Angel of Repentance, composed by Hermas, it is thus written: ‘First of all, believe that there is one» — el testimonio que aduce para esa tesis, con su título y su autor declarados: el librito llamado El Pastor o El Ángel del Arrepentimiento, compuesto por Hermas

«The Spirit of God, therefore, who moved upon the waters, as it is written, in the beginning of the creation of the world, I think to be none other than the Holy Spirit, so far as I am able to understand; just as, indeed, we have shown in our exposition of the passages themselves, not according to the narrative, but according to the spiritual understanding.”» — cómo identifica al Espíritu que se movía sobre las aguas, con la reserva con que lo dice: no otro que el Espíritu Santo, en cuanto él alcanza a entender, y según el entendimiento espiritual y no el narrativo

«Some of our predecessors have observed that in the New Testament, whenever the Spirit is named without that adjective, which designates the quality of the Spirit, the Holy Spirit is to be understood, as, for instance, Now the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, and the rest. And again here, Having begun in the Spirit, are you now concluding in the flesh?*» — la observación de sus predecesores que recoge: en el Nuevo Testamento, donde se nombra al Espíritu sin adjetivo que califique, ha de entenderse el Espíritu Santo

«We, however, think that this distinction may also be preserved in the Old Testament, as when it says, Who gives Spirit to the people who are upon the earth and Spirit to those who walk on it^ For, without doubt, everyone who walks upon the earth, that is terrestrial and bodily things, participates also in the Holy Spirit, receiving it from God.» — y la extensión que él propone: que la misma distinción se guarde en el Antiguo Testamento, de modo que todo el que anda sobre la tierra participa también del Espíritu Santo. La cita se corta antes de la llamada a nota que el troceo deja pegada con dos asteriscos

«And my Hebrew master used to say that those two seraphim, which are described in Isaiah as six-winged, crying one to another, and saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord of Sabbaoth,” were to be understood of the only-begotten Son of God and of the Holy SpiritJ*» — la exégesis que atribuye por nombre a su maestro hebreo: los dos serafines de Isaías que se gritan el trisagio serían el Hijo unigénito y el Espíritu Santo

«And we think that that expression also, which is in the song of Habakkuk, In the midst of the two living creatures (or of the two lives), you will be known,” ought to be understood of Christ and of the Holy Spirit.» — y la que él añade de su cosecha: los dos vivientes del cántico de Habacuc entendidos de Cristo y del Espíritu Santo

«For as it is said of the Son, that no one knows the Father except the Son, and he to whom the Son chooses to reveal him,? the same again does the Apostle say of the Holy Spirit, when he states, God has revealed to us by his Spirit, for the Spirit searches out everything, even the deep things of God.*'» — el paralelo de textos con que lo funda: lo que se dice del Hijo que revela al Padre lo dice el Apóstol del Espíritu que escruta lo profundo de Dios

«And one must understand, therefore, that as the Son, who alone knows the Father, reveals him to whom he will, so the Holy Spirit, who alone searches even the deep things of God, reveals God to whom he will. For the Spirit breathes where it wills.» — la simetría que traza: como el Hijo revela al Padre a quien quiere, el Espíritu, que escruta lo profundo de Dios, revela a Dios a quien quiere

«It is not to be supposed, however, that the Spirit also knows through the Son’s revelation. For if the Holy Spirit knows the Father through the Son’s revelation, he passes from ignorance to knowledge;» — la precisión con que ataja el malentendido: no ha de suponerse que el Espíritu conozca por revelación del Hijo, porque entonces pasaría de la ignorancia al conocimiento

«For even if something else existed before the Holy Spirit, it was not by progression that he came to be the Holy Spirit, as if someone should dare to say that at the time when he was not yet the Holy Spirit he was ignorant of the Father, but that after he had received knowledge, he became the Holy Spirit;» — y el argumento que lo sostiene: no llegó a ser Espíritu Santo por progresión, como si antes ignorara al Padre y al recibir conocimiento se hiciera Espíritu Santo

«I am of the opinion, then, that the working of the Father and of the Son takes place in both saints and sinners, in rational human beings and in dumb animals, and even in things which are without life, and in absolutely everything that exists;» — el reparto de las operaciones divinas que Orígenes propone como opinión propia: la del Padre y la del Hijo alcanza a santos y pecadores, a los racionales y a los mudos, y aun a lo que carece de vida

«but that the working of the Holy Spirit does not at all extend into those things which are without life, or into those which though living yet are dumb; nor is it even found in those who, though rational, still lie in wickedness,?» — y el límite que pone a la del Espíritu Santo: no alcanza a lo que carece de vida ni a lo viviente mudo, ni se halla en los racionales que yacen en la maldad

«In those alone, I think, who already turn to better things and walk in the ways of Jesus Christ,” that is, who are engaged in good actions and abide in God,* is there the work of the Holy Spirit.» — y en quiénes sí: solo en los que ya se vuelven a lo mejor y andan en los caminos de Jesucristo

«That the working of the Father and the Son is both in saints and sinners is clear from this, that all who are rational beings are partakers of the Word of God, that is, Reason, and in this way, as it were, bear certain seeds, implanted within them, of Wisdom and Justice, which is Christ."» — la prueba del primer miembro del reparto: todos los seres racionales participan del Verbo de Dios, es decir de la Razón, y llevan así implantadas ciertas semillas de Sabiduría y de Justicia, que es Cristo

«And in him who truly exists, who said by Moses, I am who I am,” all things that are have participation, which participation in the God and Father extends to all, the righteous and sinners, rational and irrational beings, and absolutely everything that exists.» — y su extensión máxima: en aquel que verdaderamente es, el que dijo por Moisés yo soy el que soy, participa todo lo que es, justos y pecadores, racionales e irracionales

«to know what evil is, if they do it they render themselves responsible for sin. And this is the meaning of the saying, that human beings have no excuse for their sin, that, from the time when the divine Word or reason has begun to show within the heart the difference between good and evil, they ought to avoid and guard against that which is evil; and also when it says, Whoever knows to do good, but does not do it, it is sin.”» — la consecuencia moral que Orígenes saca de esa participación, ya en la plana siguiente: desde que el Verbo o razón divina empieza a mostrar en el corazón la diferencia entre el bien y el mal, no hay excusa para el pecado

«Moreover, that all human beings are not without communion with God is taught in the Gospel in this way, with the Saviour saying, The kingdom is not coming with observation; neither will they say, ‘Lo, here it is! or "There!, but the kingdom of God is within you.”» — el segundo testimonio de esa comunión universal: el reino de Dios que no viene con señales sino que está dentro de vosotros

«But we must also see whether perhaps the same thing is meant by what is written in Genesis, when it says, And he breathed into his face the breath of life, and the human being became a living soul" For if this is to be understood as applying generally to all human beings, then all human beings have a participation in God. But if it is understood as spoken of the Spirit of God, since Adam also is found to have prophesied some things, then it may be accepted as given not generally but to whoever is holy.» — la alternativa que deja abierta sobre el aliento de vida del Génesis, sin arbitrar entre las dos lecturas: si vale para todos los hombres, todos participan de Dios, y si se dice del Espíritu de Dios, se da no en general sino a quien es santo

«Finally, also, at the time of the flood, when all flesh had corrupted the way of God,? it is written that God said, of the unworthy and sinners, My Spirit shall not abide with those human beings for ever, for they are flesh.” In this it is clearly shown that the Spirit of God is taken away from whoever is unworthy.» — el testimonio del diluvio y lo que muestra: que el Espíritu de Dios se retira de quien es indigno

«In the Psalms, also, it is written, You will take away their spirit, and they will die and return to the earth. You will send forth your Spirit, and they will be created and you will renew the face of the earth?» — y el del salmo que Behr usará en su introducción: quitas su espíritu y mueren y vuelven a la tierra, envías tu Espíritu y son creados

«In this way, then, is the working of the power of God the Father and of the Son extended without distinction over every creature, but participation in the Holy Spirit is possessed, we find, only by the holy ones.» — el resumen del reparto, ya en la plana siguiente: la operación del Padre y del Hijo se extiende sin distinción sobre toda criatura, y la participación en el Espíritu Santo solo la tienen los santos

«For this reason, also, I think it follows that he who has sinned against the Son of man is worthy of forgiveness,” because he who is a participant in the Word or Reason, if he ceases to live reasonably, seems to have fallen into ignorance or folly and therefore to deserve forgiveness; whereas he who has once been deemed worthy of participation in the Holy Spirit, and turned back again, is, by this very fact and deed, said to have blasphemed against the Holy Spirit.» — cómo explica desde ahí la sentencia sobre los dos pecados: quien participa del Verbo y deja de vivir racionalmente cae en ignorancia o necedad y merece perdón, y quien fue hecho digno de participar del Espíritu Santo y se vuelve atrás blasfema contra él

«Let no one indeed suppose that we, from having said that the Holy Spirit is bestowed only upon the holy ones, but that the benefits or workings of the Father and of the Son extend to the good and to the bad, to the just and to the unjust, by so doing exalt the Holy Spirit over the Father and the Son, or assert that his dignity is greater; this would assuredly not follow at all.» — la objeción que él mismo se pone y niega: que ese reparto exalte al Espíritu Santo por encima del Padre y del Hijo o le atribuya mayor dignidad

«For it is the particularity of his grace and actions that we have been describing. Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, for one fount of divinity upholds the universe by his Word or Reason and by the Spirit of his mouth sanctifies all things worthy of sanctification,» — y la razón con que la desactiva, que fija su doctrina trinitaria: lo descrito es la particularidad de su gracia y de sus acciones, y nada en la Trinidad puede llamarse mayor o menor, porque una sola fuente de divinidad sostiene el universo por su Verbo

«For all knowledge of the Father is acquired through the revelation of the Son in the Holy Spirit, so that both of these, who are called living beings» — la razón doctrinal de esas dos lecturas: todo conocimiento del Padre se adquiere por revelación del Hijo en el Espíritu Santo. La frase se corta en el cambio de plana

«called the gift of the Spirit, is ministered through the Son and worked by the God and Father. All these are worked by one and the same Spirit, dividing to each as he wills.”» — el orden de las operaciones divinas que Orígenes fija, ya en la plana siguiente: el don del Espíritu se ministra por el Hijo y lo obra el Dios y Padre

«The God and Father bestows upon all that they should be; and participation in Christ, in respect of the fact that he is the Word or Reason, renders them as rational beings. From which it follows that they are deserving either of praise or blame, because they are capable of virtue and vice.» — la gradación de participaciones que es el corazón del capítulo: el Padre otorga a todos el ser, y la participación en Cristo en cuanto Verbo o Razón los hace racionales, con lo que se vuelven merecedores de alabanza o de reproche

«For this reason, consequently, there is present the grace of the Holy Spirit, that those who are not essentially holy may be made holy by participating in it.» — y el tercer escalón: la gracia del Espíritu Santo, para que los que no son santos por esencia se hagan santos participando de ella

«When, then, they have, firstly, from the God and Father, that they should be; secondly, from the Word, that they should be rational beings; thirdly, from the Holy Spirit, that they should be holy—they become capable of Christ anew, in respect of his being the Righteousness of God, those, that is, who have previously been sanctified by the Holy Spirit; and those who have been deemed worthy to progress to this level by the sanctification of the Holy Spirit will attain, no less, to the gift of wisdom according to the power and working of the Spirit of God.» — el resumen de esa escala y lo que sigue a ella: del Padre el ser, del Verbo el ser racionales, del Espíritu Santo el ser santos, y entonces se hacen de nuevo capaces de Cristo en cuanto Justicia de Dios

«And, while pointing out each distinction of gifts, he refers them all to the fount of the universe and says, there are varieties of workings, but one God who works all in all.» — y el lugar paulino con que remite toda esa variedad a un solo origen: hay diversidad de operaciones, pero un solo Dios que obra todo en todos

«In this way, then, through the ceaseless working of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit on our behalf, exercised at each stage of progress, we may just, if firm, at the last behold the holy and blessed life,” in which, when after many struggles we are able to enter it, we ought so to continue that no satiety of that good should ever seize us," but the more we perceive of its blessedness, the more the desire for it in us should be expanded and extended, while with ever more zeal and capacity we attain and hold fast the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.» — el fin del proceso y la cláusula que el propio Orígenes le pone contra el hartazgo: que ninguna saciedad de ese bien se apodere nunca de nosotros, y que cuanto más se perciba su bienaventuranza más se dilate el deseo

«But if satiety should ever take hold of any one of those who stand on the highest and perfect stage, I do not think such a one would be removed and fall all at once, but he must descend gradually and by degrees (so that it may sometimes happen that if a brief lapse takes place, the person quickly recovers and returns to himself), not come crashing down utterly, but retrace his steps and return to his former state and be able to re-establish that which had been lost through negligence.» — la doctrina de la caída que de ahí se sigue, con el matiz que Behr subrayará: quien fuera alcanzado por la saciedad no sería removido ni caería de golpe, sino que descendería gradual y por grados, pudiendo desandar el camino

«That we might show what is this decrease or fall of those who live negligently,” it will not seem out of place to employ a comparison for illustration.» — el modo que escoge para mostrar en qué consiste esa disminución o caída de quienes viven con negligencia

«Suppose, then, someone who has gradually become experienced in practical or theoretical knowledge, for example of geometry or medicine, until he had reached perfection, having trained himself for a long time in its principles and practice, so as to acquire a complete mastery of the aforesaid art—it could never happen to such a one that, having fallen asleep skilled, he should wake up unskilled.» — el símil mismo, tomado de la geometría y la medicina: a quien se hizo perito tras largo entrenamiento no le ocurre dormirse diestro y despertar inhábil

«Let us now apply this to those who have devoted themselves to the knowledge and wisdom of God, about whom the study and practice surpasses all disciplines in incomparable ways, and let us contemplate, according to the form of the comparison proposed, what is the acquisition of knowledge or what is its disappearance, especially when we hear from the Apostle what is said of those who are perfected, that they shall behold face to face the glory of the Lord by the revelation of the mysteries.”» — la aplicación del símil, ya en la plana siguiente: a quienes se han entregado al conocimiento y la sabiduría de Dios, cuyo estudio supera incomparablemente a toda disciplina

«But wanting to show the divine benefits bestowed upon us by the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, that Trinity which is the fount of all holiness,? we have spoken of these things by way of a digression» — el aviso de método con que cierra el tramo: llama digresión a lo dicho, hecho para mostrar los beneficios divinos concedidos por la Trinidad, que es la fuente de toda santidad

«However, we shall more conveniently consider the whole subject of rational beings, which is divided into three genera and species, in the proper place, with our God through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit so allowing.» — y el aplazamiento que anuncia: el asunto entero de los seres racionales, dividido en tres géneros y especies, se tratará en su lugar

«Therefore we call this blessed and ἀρχικὴ (that is, sovereign, sustaining all things)» — la definición de la Trinidad con que abre el punto siguiente, con el término griego que la plana conserva y su glosa latina: poder soberano que todo lo sostiene. La cita se corta aquí porque el troceo imprime a continuación un par de comillas angulares, que son las que esta edición usa para lo añadido al texto y que no pueden entrar dentro de unas comillas de cita

«This is the good God and benevolent Father of the universe, the δύναμις both εὐεργετικὴ and δημιουργική,7 that is, the power that does good and creates and provides.» — y la continuación de esa misma definición, con los otros dos términos griegos que la plana conserva: el Dios bueno y Padre benévolo del universo, poder que hace el bien, crea y provee

«It is both absurd and impious to suppose that these powers bave been idle at any time even for a moment. Indeed, it is unlawful to entertain the slightest suspicion that these powers, through which primarily God is worthily known, should at any time have ceased from workings worthy of him and have become inactive.» — y el argumento que de ahí saca, que es el que dará pie al cargo de una creación eterna: es absurdo e impío suponer que esos poderes hayan estado ociosos un solo instante

«could have been hindered from without, nor, on the other hand, with nothing obstructing them, can it be believed that they were reluctant or neglected to act and work things worthy of themselves. It is therefore not possible to imagine any moment whatsoever when that beneficent power did not work good.» — el remate de ese argumento, ya en la plana siguiente: no cabe imaginar momento alguno en que aquel poder benéfico no obrara el bien

«Whence it follows that there always were those for whom it worked good, that is, his works or creatures, and that, doing good by order and desert, God dispensed, in the power of this providence, his benefits upon them. And by this it seems to follow that at no moment was God not creator, nor benefactor, nor provident.» — y la conclusión: siempre hubo aquellos para quienes obraba el bien, de modo que en ningún momento dejó Dios de ser creador, bienhechor y providente

«Yet, again, human intelligence is dulled and constrained regarding this point: in what way it is possible to understand that, from the fact that God is, his creatures have always existed and that they have subsisted, if we may so say, without a beginning, those things, that is, that must undoubtedly be believed by us to be created and made by God.» — el límite que él mismo pone enseguida: la inteligencia humana se embota al querer entender que las criaturas hayan existido siempre y subsistido sin principio, siendo como han de creerse creadas y hechas por Dios

«Since, then, there is this conflict amongst human thoughts and reasonings, the strongest arguments on both sides presenting themselves and opposing each other, and each bending the intellect of the theorist in its own direction, because of the poor and small capacity of our intellects, this occurs to us, which can be confessed without any risk to piety:» — cómo declara el estado de la cuestión y hasta dónde se compromete: hay conflicto entre los pensamientos humanos, con los argumentos más fuertes de ambos lados oponiéndose, y por la pobre capacidad de nuestros intelectos solo se afirma lo que puede confesarse sin riesgo para la piedad

«that God always has been Father, always having the only-begotten Son, who at the same time, as we explained above, is called Wisdom. This is that very Wisdom in whom God always delighted when the world was finished, that, by this, God might be understood to rejoice always.?» — y lo que sí afirma en ese terreno seguro: que Dios siempre ha sido Padre, teniendo siempre al Hijo unigénito, que es la Sabiduría en la que Dios siempre se deleitó

«created! There is nothing new under the sun. If anyone should speak of something and say, ‘Look, this is new!, it has already been, in the ages that were before us.TM» — el versículo del Eclesiastés con que apuntala el punto, ya en la plana siguiente: no hay nada nuevo bajo el sol, y lo que parece nuevo ya fue en las edades anteriores

«If, therefore, particular things which are under the sun were already in the ages, which were before us, for there is nothing new under the sun, then® without doubt all genera and species always were, and perhaps even individual things.» — y lo que de ahí deduce, con la reserva incluida: que todos los géneros y especies fueron siempre, y quizá hasta las cosas individuales

«Nevertheless, either way the fact is made clear that God did not begin at a certain time to create, when he had not done so before.» — la conclusión que da por firme sea cual sea la respuesta a lo anterior: Dios no empezó a crear en cierto tiempo, no habiéndolo hecho antes

«For we find in the holy Scriptures very many names of certain orders and functions of holy beings, as well as of the opposite kind, which we shall first lay out, and then we shall attempt, to the best of our ability, to ascertain the meaning of them.» — y su método: exponer primero los muchos nombres de órdenes y funciones que la Escritura da, y luego intentar averiguar su sentido

«There are certain holy angels of God, whom Paul calls ministering spirits, appointed to serve those who shall receive the inheritance of salvation.' Also, in the writings of the same saint Paul we find him giving the names, from whence they are I know not, of certain thrones and dominions and principalities and authorities,’» — los nombres que recoge de Pablo, con la reserva que él mismo añade sobre su origen: espíritus servidores, tronos, dominaciones, principados y autoridades

«and after the enumeration of these, as if knowing that there are still other rational ofÏces and orders beyond those which he named, he says of the Saviour, Who is above every principality and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come?» — y la fórmula paulina que abre la lista: sobre todo principado y autoridad y poder y dominación, y todo nombre que se nombra, no solo en este siglo sino en el venidero

«From which he evidently shows that there are certain others besides those which he had mentioned, which may indeed be named in this age, but were not however named by him now, and perhaps were not known by anyone else; and that there are others, which may not be named in this age, but will be named in the age to come.» — lo que Orígenes lee en esa fórmula: que hay otros órdenes nombrables en este siglo pero no nombrados, quizá por nadie conocidos, y otros que solo se nombrarán en el siglo venidero

«After the discussion concerning the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, which we have briefly treated, as far as we are able, it follows that we should also say a few words about the rational beings, their species and orders and functions, of the holy and also the wicked powers, and also about those who are between them, that is, the good and evil powers, who are, moreover, as yet placed in struggle and trial.» — abre el capítulo sobre los seres racionales anunciando su reparto: las potencias santas, las malvadas, y las que están entre ellas, puestas todavía en lucha y prueba. La introducción de Behr cita la primera línea de este mismo pasaje

«The name, then, of Devil, and Satan, and Wicked One, who is also described as being the Enemy of God,’ is mentioned in many places of Scripture. Moreover, certain angels of the devil are mentioned,’ and also a ruler of this world,’ who, whether the devil himself or someone else, is not yet clearly manifest.» — la lista de nombres del lado adverso que Orígenes recoge de la Escritura, con la abstención que le acompaña: si el príncipe de este mundo es el diablo mismo u otro no está aún claramente manifiesto

«There are also certain rulers of this world mentioned, possessing a kind of wisdom which is to be destroyed; but whether these are those rulers, who are also those principalities against whom we wrestle," or others, is not easily decided, it seems to me, by anyone.» — y la segunda abstención de esa lista: si los príncipes de este mundo dotados de una sabiduría que será destruida son los mismos principados contra los que se lucha, no lo tiene por fácil de decidir para nadie

«After the principalities, certain powers are also named, against whom we wrestle and maintain a struggle, as also against the rulers of this world and the governors of this darkness; and certain spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places are also mentioned by Paul himself." And what is to be said of the evil spirits and impure demons who are mentioned in the Gospels??» — el resto del inventario adverso: potestades, gobernadores de estas tinieblas, huestes espirituales de maldad en los lugares celestes, y los espíritus malos y demonios impuros de los Evangelios

«And, in this context where we have been discussing rational beings, it would not be right to be silent regarding ourselves, human beings, for we are certainly said to be ‘rational animals’;» — el lugar que Orígenes reserva a los hombres en ese mapa: no cabe callar sobre nosotros, porque ciertamente se nos llama animales racionales

«this, indeed, is not to be idly passed over, that even of us human beings certain different orders are named, as when it is said, The portion of the Lord is his people Jacob; Israel is the line of his inheritance, whereas other nations are called a portion of the angels,» — y el reparto que nombra dentro del propio género humano: la porción del Señor es su pueblo Jacob, y las demás naciones se llaman porción de los ángeles

«virtue as much as wickedness; or whether it should be supposed that he created some in such a way as to be altogether incapable of virtue and others able to receive no wickedness whatsoever, able only to remain in blessedness, and others again who can receive either.» — la alternativa que Orígenes plantea sobre la creación de esos órdenes: si unos fueron hechos incapaces de virtud y otros incapaces de maldad, o si todos pueden recibir lo uno y lo otro

«But, in order that our first inquiry may begin with the names themselves, let us consider whether the holy angels, from the point at which they exist, have always been holy, and are holy, and will be holy, and neither have ever received nor were able to receive an occasion of sin.» — la primera de la serie de preguntas con que examina los nombres: si los ángeles santos han sido siempre santos y nunca pudieron recibir ocasión de pecado

«Then, in the next place, let us consider whether those who are called holy principalities began, from the point they were created by God, to exercise power over others who were made subject to them, and whether these latter were created such and for this purpose, that they might be subordinate and subject.5» — la segunda: si los principados santos ejercen poder desde el momento en que fueron creados, y si los sujetos fueron creados para serlo

«Similarly, whether those who are called authorities were created such and for this purpose, that they might exercise authority, or whether this is some prize or reward for their virtue, by which they advanced to this authority and dignity.» — la tercera, con la alternativa que interesa a toda la obra: si las autoridades fueron creadas para ejercer autoridad o si esta es premio de su virtud

«Moreover, also, whether those who are called thrones (or seats) acquired that seat and stability of blessedness simultaneously with the bringing forth of their substance, so that they possess this solely by the will of the Creator; and whether those who are called dominions did not have their dominion added to them as a reward for their progress, but given as a privilege of their creation, so that it is in some way inseparable from them and natural.» — la cuarta y la quinta: si los tronos tienen esa estabilidad de bienaventuranza solo por voluntad del Creador, y si las dominaciones la tienen como privilegio de creación en vez de premio de su progreso

«Now, if we accept the view that the holy angels and holy powers and the blessed seats and the glorious powers and the magnificent dominions possess those powers and dignities and glories by essence,» — la hipótesis que examina y que va a descartar: que esos órdenes posean sus poderes, dignidades y glorias por esencia

«be separated from the determination of their own will and ascribed of necessity to their Creator—are we not forced to acknowledge the same thing regarding the good and holy powers, that is, that it is not by essence that goodness is in them, which we have clearly shown to be the case with Christ and the Holy Spirit alone,’ as also, undoubtedly, with the Father?» — el argumento de simetría con que la descarta, ya en la plana siguiente: si lo de los malos no puede atribuirse por necesidad al Creador, tampoco cabe que la bondad esté por esencia en los buenos, cosa propia solo de Cristo, del Espíritu Santo y del Padre

«For the nature of the Trinity has been shown to have nothing that is compound, lest these properties might seem to come to apply subsequently.» — la razón que lo apoya: se ha mostrado que la naturaleza de la Trinidad nada tiene de compuesto

«From which it remains that, in the case of every creature, it is by its works and its movements that those powers, who appear to hold sway over others or to exercise authority or dominion, are set above and placed over those whom they are said to rule or on whom they exercise their authority, from their merits and not by a privilege of creation.”» — y la conclusión que fija para toda criatura: los que mandan o ejercen autoridad están puestos sobre los otros por sus obras y movimientos, por sus méritos y no por privilegio de creación

«But that we might not appear to be making assertions about such important and difÏcult matters solely on the basis of inference or to compel the assent of our hearers by conjectures alone, let us see whether we can obtain any statements from the holy Scriptures, by the authority of which these positions may be more credibly maintained.» — la cautela de método con que pasa a la prueba escrituraria: no quiere afirmar cosas tan importantes y difíciles por sola inferencia ni forzar el asentimiento por conjeturas

«First we shall adduce what the holy Scriptures contain regarding wicked powers; then we shall next investigate the others, as the Lord shall be pleased to enlighten us, that in matters of such difÏculty we may arrive at what is closest to the truth or what should be our belief according to the rule of piety.?!» — y el orden y el criterio de esa prueba: primero lo que la Escritura dice de las potencias malvadas, para llegar a lo más cercano a la verdad o a lo que debe creerse según la regla de la piedad

«Now, we find in the prophet Ezekiel two prophecies addressed to the prince of Tyre, the first of which might appear to anyone, before he heard the second also, to be spoken of some man who was the prince of the Tyrians.» — el primer testimonio que aduce: las dos profecías de Ezequiel al príncipe de Tiro, de las que la primera podría parecer dicha de un hombre a quien no haya oído la segunda

«was blameless and was placed in the paradise of God, adorned with a crown of comeliness and beauty, how, I ask, is it to be supposed that such a one was inferior in any way to any of the holy ones? For he is described as having been himself a crown of comeliness and beauty and as having walked blameless in the paradise of God; and how can anyone suppose that such a being was not one of those holy and blessed powers which, as assuredly placed in blessedness, one must believe to be endowed with no other honour than this?» — el argumento que saca de esa segunda profecía, ya en la plana siguiente: si fue irreprensible y estuvo en el paraíso de Dios con corona de hermosura, cómo suponerlo inferior a ninguno de los santos

«regarding the prince of Tyre refer to an adverse power, by which it is most clearly demonstrated that that power was formerly holy and blessed, from which blessedness he fell, from the point when iniquity was found in him, and was cast upon the earth, and was not such by nature or creation.» — lo que Orígenes concluye de ella, ya en la plana siguiente, y que es la tesis de todo el capítulo: esa potencia adversa fue antes santa y bienaventurada, cayó desde ahí y no era tal por naturaleza ni por creación

«We think, therefore, that these words were spoken of a certain angel who had been appointed to the ofÏce of governing the Tyrian people, and to whose care their souls also seem to have been entrusted.» — y a quién adjudica esas palabras: a un ángel puesto al cargo de gobernar al pueblo de Tiro, a cuyo cuidado parecen haberse encomendado también sus almas

«But what Tyre, or what souls of Tyrians, we ought to understand, whether that Tyre situated within the region of the province of Phoenicia, or some other of which this one we know on earth is a figure, and whether the souls of the Tyrians are those of the former or those of the inhabitants of that Tyre which is spiritually understood, does not seem to need investigation here, lest perhaps we should appear to investigate in passing matters of such importance and so great obscurity that they demand a work and treatment of their own.”» — la cuestión que declara expresamente fuera de su alcance aquí: qué Tiro y qué almas de tirios hayan de entenderse, si la de Fenicia o la que se entiende espiritualmente

«Moreover, the Saviour himself also teaches us, saying of the devil, Behold, I see Satan fallen like lightning from heaven,” for he once was light.» — el tercer testimonio, ya en la plana siguiente, y lo que Orígenes deduce de él: caído como un rayo del cielo, porque antes fue luz

«Furthermore, our Lord, who is the truth, compared even the power of his own glorious advent to lightning, saying, For as the lightning shines from one end of heaven to the other, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.” Yet he nevertheless compares Satan to lightning and says that he fell from heaven in order that, by this, he might show him to have been in heaven, to have had a place among the holy ones, and to have participated in that light in which all the holy ones participate, by which they are made angels of light? and the apostles are said, by the Lord, to be the light of the world.”» — el argumento que teje con la misma imagen: el Señor comparó con el relámpago su propia venida gloriosa, y al decir que Satanás cayó del cielo lo muestra habiendo tenido lugar entre los santos y participado de aquella luz

«In this manner, then, even this one was once light, before he went astray and fell to this place and had his glory turned into dust, which is the particular mark of the wicked, as the prophet also says, from which too he was called the ruler of this world,” that is, of an earthly habitation, for he ruled over those who were obedient to his wickedness, since the whole of this world (I now call ‘world’ this earthly place?) lies in the evil one," that is, in this apostate.» — el resumen de esa caída: fue luz antes de extraviarse y caer a este lugar y trocar su gloria en polvo, y de ahí el nombre de príncipe de este mundo, porque mandaba sobre los obedientes a su maldad

«That he is an apostate (that is, fugitive*), the Lord also, in Job, says, You will catch, with a fish hook, the apostate (that is, a fugitive) dragon.” It is certain that by the dragon is understood the devil himself.”» — el último testimonio del tramo, tomado de Job, con la glosa latina que el texto trae: el dragón apóstata, que se entiende del diablo mismo

«If, therefore, the opposing powers are called apostates, and are said to have once been blameless, while to be blameless exists essentially in none except the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, but holiness is an accidental quality in every created being (for what is accidental is able also to fall away?*),» — el silogismo con que cierra: si las potencias adversas se llaman apóstatas y se dicen antes irreprensibles, y ser irreprensible es esencial solo en el Padre, el Hijo y el Espíritu Santo, la santidad es cualidad accidental en toda criatura, y lo accidental puede también caer

«The Word of the Lord, he says, came to me, saying: Son of man, take up a lament over the prince of Tyre, and say to him, Thus says the Lord God: You were a signet of likeness and a crown of beauty among the delights of the paradise of God; you were adorned with every fine stone or gem, and were clothed with carnelian and topaz and emerald and carbuncle and sapphire and jasper, set in gold and silver and agate and amethyst and chrysolite and beryl and onyx; you filled your treasuries with gold and your storehouses among you.» — la profecía de Ezequiel que Orígenes transcribe, primer tramo: sello de semejanza y corona de belleza entre las delicias del paraíso de Dios, cubierto de piedra fina y vestido de cornalina, topacio, esmeralda y las demás gemas

«From the day <you> were created with the cherubim, I placed you in the holy mountain of God. You were in the midst of the fiery stones; you were blameless in your days, from the day you were created until iniquities were found in you; from the abundance of your commerce you did fill your storehouses with iniquity and you sinned and were wounded from the mountain of God.» — segundo tramo, con los corchetes angulares con que esta edición marca lo añadido al texto: creado con los querubines y puesto en el monte santo, irreprensible hasta que se hallaron iniquidades en él

«And a cherub drove you from the midst of the fiery stones; your heart was elated because of your comeliness, and your knowledge was corrupted with your beauty; on account of the multitude of your sins, I cast you down upon the earth in the presence of kings; I have gi» — tercer tramo, que es el de la caída: un querubín lo expulsó de en medio de las piedras de fuego porque su corazón se engrió por su hermosura y su conocimiento se corrompió con su belleza

«Again, we are taught such things by the prophet Isaiah about another opposing power. He says, How did the Day Star, who used to arise in the morning, fall from heaven? He who assailed all nations has been crushed and beaten to the earth.» — el segundo testimonio, el del Lucero de la mañana en Isaías, que cayó del cielo y fue quebrantado en tierra

«You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend into heaven, above the stars of heaven shall I place my throne; I will sit upon a lofty mountain, above the lofty mountains which are towards the north; I will ascend above the clouds; I will be like the Most High. But now you will be brought down to the lower world and to the foundations of the earth. Those who see you will be amazed at you, and will say, “This is the human being who used to trouble the whole earth, who shook kings, who made the whole wo» — y las cinco declaraciones de ascenso que la profecía pone en su boca, seguidas del descenso al mundo inferior y a los fundamentos de la tierra

«or, through sloth and negligence, we fall from blessedness into wickedness and ruin to such a degree that, through too great an advance, so to speak, in wickedness, one may descend even to that state (if one shall have neglected himself to such an extent) that he may become what is called an opposing power.» — el remate del silogismo, ya en la plana siguiente: por pereza y negligencia se cae de la bienaventuranza hasta el punto de que uno llegue a ser lo que se llama una potencia adversa

«An end or consummation would seem to be an indication that things are perfected and consummated.”» — abre el capítulo sobre el fin con la definición mínima del término: fin o consumación indicaría que las cosas quedan perfeccionadas y consumadas

«Which now reminds us that, regarding these things which are so hard and difÏcult to understand, if anyone cherishes a desire to read them and to understand such things he ought to apply a perfect and instructed understanding, lest, perchance, if he has no experience in investigations of this kind, they may appear to him as vain and superfluous, or if, by other investigations, his mind is already prejudiced and closed, he may reckon these to be heretical and opposed to the ecclesiastical faith, not so much convincing by reason but determining by the prejudice of his own mind.» — la advertencia al lector con que sigue, que es también una defensa anticipada: quien lea estas cosas ha de aplicar un entendimiento perfecto e instruido, para no tenerlas por vanas o por heréticas por prejuicio de su propia mente

«There will be, then, an end and consummation of the world, when every one shall be subjected to punishments on account of sins; this time, when he will render to each one what is deserved, is known to God alone.“» — y la primera afirmación sobre el fin, con su abstención: habrá fin y consumación del mundo cuando cada uno sea sometido a castigos por sus pecados, y ese tiempo solo Dios lo conoce

«But if even that plain statement of the Apostle has not sufÏciently informed us what is meant by enemies being placed under [his] feet, listen to him in what follows, For all things must be subjected to him.» — cómo aborda el sometimiento final, ya en la plana siguiente, a partir del enunciado paulino

«What then is this subjection by which all things must be made subject to Christ? I am of the opinion that it is the same subjection by which we also wish to be subject to him, by which the apostles, and all the saints who have followed Christ, were also subject to him. For the word ‘subjection, as to how we are subject to Christ, indicates the salvation, which is of Christ, of those who are subject; as David said, Shall not my soul be subject to God? For from him comes my salvation.”» — la respuesta que da, y que es la clave de su escatología: esa sujeción es la misma con que los apóstoles y los santos quisieron sujetarse a Cristo, y la palabra sujeción indica la salvación de los sujetos

«But,” if they are negligent and careless about such participation, then each one, by fault of his own slothfulness,» — cómo explica la caída, ya en la plana siguiente: por negligencia respecto de esa participación cada uno se hace, por su propia pereza, causa de su propio desliz. La llamada a nota que el troceo deja pegada con dos asteriscos queda fuera de la cita, y el tramo sigue en la línea siguiente

«becomes—one more quickly, another more slowly, one to a greater extent, another to a lesser—the cause of his own lapse or fall.» — continuación del mismo pasaje al otro lado de esa llamada a nota

«And since, as we have said, this fall or lapse, by which each one departs from his original state, has in itself the greatest diversity, according to the impulse of the intellect or intention, one falls slightly, another more seriously, to the lower things: in this is the just judgement of the providence of God, that it should happen to everyone according to the diversity of his conduct, in proportion to the merit of his declension and revolt.» — y la justicia que ve en la diversidad resultante: a cada uno según la diversidad de su conducta, en proporción al mérito de su declinación y de su revuelta

«Certain of those, indeed, who have remained in that beginning, which we have described as being similar to the end which is to come, are allocated, in the ordering and arranging of the world, the rank of angels, others that of powers, others of principalities, others of authorities (clearly that they may exercise authority over those who need to have authority over their head), others the rank of thrones (that is, having the ofÏce of judging or ruling those who need this), others dominion (doubtless over slaves); all of which divine providence bestows upon them, in fair and just judgement, according to their merit and the progress by which they advanced in the participation and imitation» — el origen que da a los órdenes celestes: quienes permanecieron en aquel principio reciben en la ordenación del mundo el rango de ángeles, potestades, principados, autoridades, tronos y dominaciones, según su mérito y su progreso

«of God. Those,? however, who have been removed from their state of primal blessedness, yet not removed irremediably, have been made subject to the governance and rule of those holy and blessed orders, which we have described above; availing themselves of their help, and being reformed by their instruction and salutary discipline, they may be able to return and be restored to their former state of blessedness.» — y la función que da a los órdenes superiores respecto de los caídos, ya en la plana siguiente: los removidos no irremediablemente quedan bajo su gobierno y, reformados por su instrucción y disciplina saludable, pueden volver a su primer estado

«It is from these, I suggest, as far as I am able to understand, that this order of the human race has been established, which, in the future age or in the coming ages, when there shall be a new heaven and new earth, according to Isaiah,” will certainly be restored to that unity promised by the Lord Jesus,» — el origen que de ahí propone para el género humano, con la reserva con que lo dice: de esos quedó constituido este orden del género humano, que en la edad venidera será restaurado a la unidad prometida

«I do not pray for these alone, but for all who shall believe in me through their word, that all may be one, as I, Father, am in you, and you in me, that they also may be one in us; and again, where he says, That they may be one, even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may be perfected in one;?» — las dos oraciones joánicas en que funda esa unidad: que todos sean uno como el Padre y el Hijo son uno, y perfeccionados en uno

«But” whether any of these orders, which live under the rule of the devil and obey his malice, will be able in some future age to be converted to goodness,» — la pregunta que deja abierta, y que es la más disputada de toda su obra: si alguno de esos órdenes podrá convertirse al bien en alguna edad futura

«through the faculty of free will which is in them, or whether persistent and inveterate wickedness might be changed, by habit, into a kind of nature, you, reader, must judge,» — y cómo la deja, ya en la plana siguiente, remitiéndola expresamente al lector en vez de resolverla

«From? which, so I think, this consequence appears to be demonstrated, that every rational being is able, passing from one order to another, to go from each order to all and from all to each, while it continues, through its faculty of free will, susceptible of promotions and demotions according to its own actions and efforts.?» — la consecuencia que de ahí extrae, con la reserva de opinión: todo ser racional puede pasar de un orden a otro, de cada uno a todos y de todos a cada uno, mientras siga siendo susceptible de ascensos y descensos por su libre albedrío

«Now, since Paul says that some things are seen and temporal, and others, besides these, unseen and eternal,’* we ask how those things which are seen are transient—whether because there will be nothing at all after this [world], in all those periods or ages to come in which the dispersion and division from the one beginning is restored to one and the same end and likeness, or because while the form of the things that are seen passes away, their substance, however, is in no way corrupted.”» — la alternativa que plantea sobre el paso de lo visible: si no habrá nada en absoluto después de este mundo, o si al pasar la forma de lo que se ve su sustancia no se corrompe

«And Paul seems to confirm the latter view, when he says, The form of this world passes away."$ David, also, seems to indicate the same thing, when he says, The heavens will perish, but you will endure; and they will all become old like a garment, and you will change them like clothing, like a garment they will be changed."» — los dos testimonios con que se inclina por la segunda: la forma de este mundo pasa, y los cielos envejecen como vestido y son mudados como ropa

«For if the heavens are to be changed, assuredly that which is changed does not perish; and if the form of the world passes away, it is not, by any means, an annihilation or destruction of the material substance that is indicated, but a kind of change of quality and transformation of form takes place.» — y el razonamiento que saca: lo que se muda no perece, y al pasar la forma del mundo no se indica aniquilación ni destrucción de la sustancia material sino un cambio de cualidad y una transformación de forma

«Isaiah, also, when he says prophetically that there will be a new heaven and a new earth,’® undoubtedly suggests something similar. For this renewal of heaven and earth, and the transmutation of the form of this world, and the changing of the heavens will undoubtedly be prepared for those who, travelling along the way which we have indicated above, are stretching out towards that end of blessedness, to which even the enemies themselves are said to be subjected, in which end God is said to be all and in all.”» — y para quiénes se prepara esa renovación de cielo y tierra: para los que, andando el camino indicado, se tienden hacia el fin de bienaventuranza en el que Dios es dicho todo en todos

«For it has been pointed out by us above what are those points that must be clearly determined by dogma, which, I think, we have done to the best of our ability when we spoke about the Trinity; but now, however, we are occupied, as best we can, in matters of a kind needing discussion rather than definition.» — y el contraste que la acompaña: lo que debe determinarse claramente por dogma ya quedó dicho al tratar de la Trinidad, y ahora se está en materias que piden discusión más que definición

«and just as the same Apostle now exhorts us, who even in the present life are placed in the Church, in which is the figure of the kingdom to come, to this same image of unity, saying,» — la aplicación presente que da a esa unidad: la Iglesia, en la que está la figura del reino venidero, es exhortada a esa misma imagen de unidad

«It* should be known, however, that some of those who fell away from that one beginning, which we have spoken about above, have given themselves to such unworthiness and wickedness that they have become undeserving of that instruction and training by which the human race, through the flesh, with the aid of the heavenly powers, is being instructed and trained, but, on the contrary, they are adversaries and opponents of those who are being trained and formed.» — la parte del reparto que Orígenes reserva a los irreductibles: algunos de los caídos se dieron a tal indignidad que quedaron indignos de esa instrucción y son adversarios de los que se forman

«And thus it is that this whole life of mortals is full of conflicts and struggles, for opposing and attacking us are those who have fallen from a better condition without any looking back, who are called the devil and his angels and the other orders of wickedness, which the Apostle names amongst the opposing powers.» — y lo que de ahí explica: toda esta vida de los mortales está llena de conflictos y luchas, porque nos atacan los caídos sin mirar atrás, llamados el diablo y sus ángeles

«All souls and all rational beings, whether they are holy or wicked, were made or created. They are all, according to their proper nature, bodiless;’ even despite this fact, that they are bodiless, they are nonetheless created, because all things were made by God through Christ, as John teaches, in a comprehensive way, in the Gospel, saying: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him and without him was nothing made.’» — la tesis con que abre el capítulo sobre los seres celestes: todas las almas y todos los seres racionales, santos o malvados, fueron hechos o creados, y aunque incorpóreos por su propia naturaleza son creados igualmente

«Moreover, when describing created things by species, and numbers, and orders, the Apostle Paul, who shows that all things were made through Christ, speaks in this way, saying: And in him were all things created, things in heaven and things on earth, whether visible or invisible, whether thrones or dominions, or principalities, or authorities: all things were created by him and in him, and he is before all things, and he is the head.’» — el lugar paulino con que lo apuntala, con su enumeración de órdenes: tronos, dominaciones, principados y autoridades, todo creado por él y en él

«Clearly therefore he declares that in Christ and through Christ were all things made and created, whether visible, which are bodily, or invisible, which I judge to be none other than th» — y lo que Orígenes lee en esa enumeración: en Cristo y por Cristo fue hecho todo, lo visible que es corpóreo y lo invisible

«inference: [to ask] whether they also ought to be reckoned among the principalities, on account of their being said to be made in ἀρχάς (that is, for rulership) of the day and of the night? or whether they are to be supposed to have only that rulership of the day and of the night which they accomplish in the ofÏce of illuminating them, but are not however of the order and ofÏce of principalities?» — la duda que deja planteada sobre los astros, ya en la plana siguiente: si han de contarse entre los principados por decirse hechos para el señorío del día y de la noche, o si solo tienen ese señorío en cuanto los iluminan

«And, then, since the course of the discussion has clearly found that all things were made or created, and that among those things which were made there is nothing which may not accept good or evil, and be capable of either, how shall we reckon as consistent the opinion held even by some of our own people about the sun and moon and stars, that they are unchangeable and incapable of becoming the opposite of what they are?» — la contradicción que señala en una opinión corriente entre los suyos: si todo lo hecho puede recibir el bien o el mal, cómo tener al sol, la luna y las estrellas por inmutables e incapaces de volverse lo contrario de lo que son

«Not a few have thought such even about the holy angels, and certain heretics [have thought the same] even of souls, which they call spiritual beings.» — y quiénes sostienen lo mismo de otros seres: no pocos lo piensan de los ángeles santos, y ciertos herejes de las almas, a las que llaman seres espirituales

«First, then, let us see what reason itself can discover about the sun and moon and stars, whether what some suppose is right, that they are foreign to changeability; and, as far as possible, let the statement of the holy Scriptures be first adduced.?» — el orden que se impone para esa cuestión: primero lo que la razón misma descubre, y antes de nada el enunciado de las santas Escrituras

«But to make this point more clearly understood, we ought to inquire, first, whether it is right to think that they are living and rational beings; then, next, whether their souls came into existence along with their bodies or whether they are discerned to be before the bodies; and, also, whether it is to be understood that, after the consummation of the age, they are to be released from their bodies and, just as we cease from this life, so they too will cease from illuminating the world.» — las tres preguntas en que descompone la cuestión de los astros: si son vivientes y racionales, si sus almas nacieron con sus cuerpos o son anteriores, y si tras la consumación quedarán libres de esos cuerpos

«Although to inquire into these things may seem somewhat audacious, yet, roused as we are by the desire to ascertain the truth, it does not seem absurd to examine and to test, by the grace of the Holy Spirit, all that is possible for us.» — y la licencia que se toma para preguntarlo, declarando su propio atrevimiento: movido por el deseo de averiguar la verdad, no le parece absurdo examinar cuanto le sea posible por la gracia del Espíritu Santo

«We think, therefore, that they may be designated as living beings, because they are said to receive commandments from God, for that does not normally happen except to rational living beings.» — el primer argumento a favor de tenerlos por vivientes: se dice que reciben mandamientos de Dios, lo cual no suele ocurrir sino a vivientes racionales

«What are these commandments? Clearly that each star, in its order and course, should supply the world with splendour to the extent entrusted to it. Those called ‘planets’ move in one kind of course, and those called ἀπλανεῖς [that is, ‘fixed’} in another.» — en qué consisten esos mandamientos según él: que cada astro, en su orden y su curso, dé al mundo el esplendor que se le confía, unos como planetas y otros como fijos. El corchete con griego es el que imprime la plana

«It is most clearly shown from this, that no movement can take place in any body without a soul nor can living beings be at any time without movement.”» — el segundo argumento, que es de principio: ningún movimiento puede darse en un cuerpo sin alma, ni pueden los vivientes estar en algún momento sin movimiento

«With stars, then, moving with such order and regularity, such that their courses do not appear at any time ever to be derailed, how would it not be the height of obtuseness to say that such order and such observance of rule and plan is carried out or accomplished by irr» — y el tercero, por el orden observado: siendo tan regulares los cursos que nunca parecen descarrilar, sería el colmo de la obtusidad decir que tal orden lo lleva a cabo algo irracional

«I suspect, in fact, that the spirit was implanted from without, but it seems to be a valuable task to demonstrate this from the Scriptures. To make the assertion through inference will be seen to be easy, but assuredly more difÏcult for it to be established by the testimonies of the Scriptures.» — la sospecha que Orígenes declara sobre el origen del alma, ya en la plana siguiente, con la dificultad que reconoce: le parece implantada desde fuera, y le resulta fácil mostrarlo por inferencia y más difícil por testimonios de la Escritura

«Now it may be shown to be possible by inference thus: if the soul of a human being, which, while it remains the soul of a human being, is certainly inferior, is proved to have not been made with the body but separately and implanted from without,'® much more is this the case with those living beings which are called celestial.» — la inferencia misma: si el alma humana, que es inferior, se prueba no hecha con el cuerpo sino implantada desde fuera, con mayor razón valdrá de los vivientes celestes

«Now, with regard to the human being, how will the soul of him who supplanted his brother in the womb, that is, Jacob," appear to be formed together with the body?» — el primero de los tres casos escriturarios con que lo apoya: el alma de Jacob, que suplantó a su hermano en el vientre

«Or how could the soul of him who, while lying in his mother’s womb, was filled with the Holy Spirit, be formed or fashioned together with the body? I mean John, leaping in his mother's womb and jumping with great joy because the sound of the salutation of Mary had come to the ears of his mother Elizabeth.*» — el segundo: el alma de Juan, lleno del Espíritu Santo en el vientre y saltando de gozo al saludo de María

«How could that soul who, before he was fashioned in the womb, is said to be known by God, and, before he came from the womb, was sanctified by him, be formed or fashioned together with the body?? Otherwise it would seem that God fills some with the Holy Spirit neither by judgement nor according to merits, and sanctifies [them] undeservedly.» — el tercero, con el corolario que hace la fuerza del argumento: de otro modo parecería que Dios llena a algunos del Espíritu Santo sin juicio ni méritos y los santifica inmerecidamente

«And how shall we avoid that word which says, Is there unrighteousness with God? By no means? Or this, Is there no respect of persons with God?» — y las dos preguntas escriturarias con que remata: si hay injusticia en Dios, y si hay acepción de personas en Dios

«thus: For, he says, the creation was subjected to vanity, not willingly but by reason of him who subjected it in hope, because creation itself shall be set free from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the sons of God.*» — el pasaje paulino sobre la creación sujeta a la vanidad, que Orígenes va a desmenuzar y que Behr pone en el centro de su lectura de la caída

«To what vanity, pray, was the creation subject, or what creation, or how is it not willingly, or in what hope? And how is the creation itself to be set free from the bondage of corruption? Moreover, the same Apostle also says in another place, For the expectation of the creation waits for the revelation of the sons of God.” And again elsewhere he says, And not only we, but also creation itself groans and is in travail until now.» — la serie de preguntas en que lo descompone: a qué vanidad, qué creación, cómo no de grado, en qué esperanza, y cuáles son sus gemidos y dolores. La llamada a nota que el troceo deja pegada con dos asteriscos queda fuera de la cita, y el tramo sigue en la línea siguiente

«Hence it must be asked what are its groans and what are the pains?» — continuación del mismo pasaje al otro lado de esa llamada a nota

«Let us first see, then, what is the vanity to which the creation is subject. I reckon that the vanity is nothing other than the body; for although the body of the stars is ethereal,” it is nevertheless material.» — la respuesta que da a la primera: la vanidad no es otra cosa que el cuerpo, porque aunque el cuerpo de los astros sea etéreo es material

«Whence also Solomon, it seems to me, arraigns the whole of bodily nature as somehow burdensome and impeding the vigour of spirits” this way: Vanity of vanities, all is vanity, says the Preacher; all is vanity. I have looked, he says, and have seen all things that are under the sun, and, behold, all is vanity??» — el testimonio que suma, con la lectura que hace de él: Salomón acusa a toda la naturaleza corporal como gravosa y estorbo para el vigor de los espíritus

«To this, then, was creation subjected, especially that creation which assuredly possesses, by virtue of its function, the greatest and most eminent authority in this world; that is, the sun and the moon and the stars are said to be subject to vanity because they were clothed with bodies and allotted the task of giving light to the human race.» — y a quiénes aplica la sujeción: al sol, la luna y las estrellas, que se dicen sujetos a vanidad porque fueron revestidos de cuerpos y destinados a alumbrar al género humano

«Consider also that passage—whether perhaps this saying of Paul can also be applied to those who, although not willingly, yet by the will of him who subjected them and in hope of the promises, are made subject to vanity— where he says: I would wish to be dissolved (or return) and be with Christ; for it is far better.”» — la audacia exegética con que sigue, ya en la plana siguiente: pone en boca de los astros el deseo paulino de ser desatado y estar con Cristo

«For I think that the sun too might say likewise, I would wish to be dissolved (or return) and be with Christ; for it is far better? And whereas Paul adds, But to remain in the flesh is more necessary on your account? the sun might say, "To abide in this celestial and shining body is more necessary on account of the revelation of the sons of God:» — el desarrollo de esa figura: también el sol diría que querría ser desatado, y que permanecer en este cuerpo celeste y brillante es más necesario por la revelación de los hijos de Dios

«Let us now consider what is the freedom of the creation and its deliverance from bondage. When Christ shall have delivered up the kingdom to the God and Father? then those living things, when they shall have first been made the kingdom of Christ, shall also be delivered up, together with the whole of that kingdom, to the rule of the Father; so that when God shall be ail in all;5 they also, since they are a part of the all, may have God in themselves, as he is in all things.» — y el término que da a esa libertad de la creación: entregado el reino al Padre, esos vivientes, hechos antes reino de Cristo, serán entregados con todo el reino al gobierno del Padre, y al ser Dios todo en todos también ellos lo tendrán en sí

«Now, when it is said that all things were made through him and in him were created all things, whether things in heaven or things on earth,» — lo que Orígenes da por seguro sobre los astros: dicho que todo fue hecho por él y en él fue creado, lo del cielo y lo de la tierra, no cabe duda de que también lo del firmamento se cuenta entre los seres celestes

«A similar method or reasoning must be used in regard to the angels, it seems to me, not supposing that it happens accidentally that a particular ofÏce is assigned to a particular angel, curing and healing, for example, to Rafael, supervising wars to Gabriel, attending to the prayers and supplications of mortals to Michael.’» — abre el capítulo sobre los ángeles con la posición que va a sostener y con los tres oficios que nombra: curar y sanar a Rafael, presidir las guerras a Gabriel, atender las oraciones de los mortales a Miguel

«It should be supposed that they deserve these ofÏces in no other way than by their own merits and receive them on account of the zeal and virtue which they displayed before the construction of this world;» — y de dónde hace venir esos oficios: de sus propios méritos y del celo y la virtud que mostraron antes de la construcción de este mundo

«then, afterwards, this or that kind of ofÏce was assigned to each in the order of archangels, while others deserved to be enrolled in the order of angels and to act under this or that archangel, or under that leader or ruler of his order» — cómo describe el reparto resultante: unos en el orden de los arcángeles y otros inscritos en el de los ángeles, obrando bajo este o aquel arcángel

«All these things, as we have said, were arranged not accidentally nor indiscriminately, but by the most appropriate and righteous judgement of God and were disposed by merit, with God himself judging and approving: so that to one angel the Church of the Ephesians would be entrusted, to another the Church of the $myrnaeans;? one angel was to be Peter's, another Paul's;* and then such and such angels, who daily behold the face of God, would be entrusted to each of the little ones, who are in the Church? and there would also be some angel who encamps round about them that fear God.» — y la serie de encomiendas que enumera como prueba: una iglesia a un ángel y otra a otro, uno para Pedro y otro para Pablo, los que ven el rostro de Dios para cada pequeño, y el que acampa alrededor de los que temen a Dios

«All of these [functions], assuredly, it is to be supposed, are not performed by accident or chance, nor because they [the angels] were made such by nature, lest in doing this God be charged with partiality; but it is to be believed that they were conferred by God, the most just and impartial ruler of all things,» — el motivo que da a esa doctrina y que gobierna todo el capítulo: si los ángeles fueran tales por naturaleza, se acusaría a Dios de parcialidad

«that to one and the same creator should be ascribed diverse natures of rational beings, they are nevertheless ignorant of the cause of that diversity? They say that it does not seem logical that one and the same creator, with there being no grounds for merits, should confer upon some the power of domination and subject others to domination, that he should bestow principalities on some and make others subject to principalities.» — la objeción de los adversarios que consigna, ya en la plana siguiente: no les parece lógico que un mismo creador, sin fundamento de méritos, dé a unos el dominio y sujete a otros

«All such opinions, indeed, as I would reckon, are refuted and confuted by thinking through that reasoning which we developed above, by which the cause of the diversity and variety between each creature was shown to derive from their own conduct—whether more zealous or more sluggish, according to virtue or malice—and not to an unfairness on the part of the Arranger.» — y su respuesta: esas opiniones quedan objetadas por el razonamiento ya desarrollado, que hacía venir la diversidad de la conducta propia de cada criatura y no de una injusticia del Ordenador

«But, that this may be more easily understood to be the case with heavenly beings, let us borrow an example from what has been done or is done among human beings, in order that from visible things we may, by inference, behold things invisible too.» — el método que emplea a continuación: tomar un ejemplo de lo humano para contemplar por inferencia, desde lo visible, también lo invisible

«They [our opponents] will afÏrm that Paul and Peter were without doubt of a spiritual nature? When, therefore, Paul is found to have done much that is contrary to religion, in having persecuted the Church of God,” and Peter to have committed so grave a sin as, when questioned by the maid who kept the door, to have asserted with an oath that he did not know who Christ was,"' how is it possible that these—who, according to them, were spiritual—should have fallen into sins like this, especially as they are in the habit of frequently asserting and saying that if is not possible for a good tree to produce evil fruit?’» — el argumento personal con que objeta a quienes tienen a Pablo y a Pedro por espirituales por naturaleza: uno persiguió a la Iglesia y el otro negó con juramento conocer a Cristo, y ellos mismos repiten que un árbol bueno no puede dar fruto malo

«but from that, however, it does not follow that every human being will sail; or, again, it is possible for every human being to learn the art of grammar or medicine, but it is not therefore proved that every human being is either a doctor or a grammarian; so, if we say that there is no nature which is not able to allow evil in, it has not necessarily been shown, however, [that every being] has allowed evil in.'^» — la distinción entre poder y hacer con que precisa su tesis, ya en la plana siguiente: que todo hombre pueda navegar o aprender medicina no se sigue que navegue o sea médico, y que ninguna naturaleza sea incapaz de admitir el mal no basta para tener por admitido el mal

«For, in our view, not even the devil himself was incapable of good; but although able to allow the good in, he does not, however, also desire it or make any effort towards virtue.”» — y hasta dónde lleva esa distinción, que es de las afirmaciones más discutidas del libro: ni el diablo mismo era incapaz del bien, aunque pudiendo admitirlo no lo desea ni hace esfuerzo hacia la virtud

«For as we are taught by those quotations we cited from the prophets, he was at one time good, when he dwelt in the paradise of God, among the cherubim.'*» — el apoyo escriturario que le da: los pasajes proféticos ya citados, donde aquel fue bueno cuando habitaba en el paraíso de Dios entre los querubines

«Just as he had in himself the capacity of allowing in either virtue or evil, and falling away from virtue he turned with his whole mind towards evil, so also other creatures, having the capacity for either, by avoiding evil by their will, they cleave to the good.» — y la simetría con que lo generaliza: como él, teniendo capacidad para lo uno y lo otro, se volvió con toda su mente al mal, así otras criaturas, evitando el mal por su voluntad, se adhieren al bien

«There is no nature, therefore, which does not allow in good or evil except the nature of God, which is the fountain of all good things, and of Christ: for he is wisdom, and wisdom assuredly is not able to allow folly in; and he is righteousness, and righteousness will certainly never allow unrighteousness in; and he is word and reason, which indeed cannot be made irrational; moreover, he is also light, and it is certain that darkness does not overcome the light.'?» — la única excepción que admite a esa capacidad doble, argumentada título por título: la naturaleza de Dios y la de Cristo, que es sabiduría y no admite necedad, justicia y no admite injusticia, verbo y razón y no puede hacerse irracional, luz a la que la tiniebla no vence

«Similarly, also, the nature of the Holy Spirit, being holy, does not admit of pollution, for it is naturally or substantially holy. If any other nature is holy, it is so as sanctified by the reception» — y la tercera excepción, con el criterio que la distingue: el Espíritu Santo es santo natural o sustancialmente, y cualquier otra naturaleza santa lo es por recepción

«always demonstrate zeal for it, we shall always participate in wisdom, and that will happen to us to a greater or lesser extent, depending upon the worthiness of our life and the degree of our zeal. For the goodness of God, as is befitting to him, incites and attracts all to that blessed end, where all pain and sorrow and sighing have fled away" and disappear.» — el fin al que Orígenes hace tender esa participación, ya en la plana siguiente: la bondad de Dios incita y atrae a todos a aquel fin bienaventurado donde han huido el dolor, la tristeza y el gemido

«As far as it seems to me, I think that the preceding discussion has sufÏciently proved that it is not from any random or chance occurrence that the principalities hold their princedoms or the other orders are assigned their respective ofÏces, but they have obtained the degree of their dignity in proportion to their merits, although it is not for us to know or inquire what those acts were through which they deserved to come into a particular order.» — el balance del capítulo, con la abstención incluida: los órdenes obtuvieron su dignidad en proporción a sus méritos, aunque no nos toca saber ni preguntar cuáles fueron los actos por los que merecieron entrar en tal orden

«It is sufÏcient to know this much, to demonstrate the impartiality and righteousness of God, that, according to the statement of the Apostle Paul, there is no respect of persons with God," who rather dispenses everything in accordance with the merit and progress of each.» — y lo que basta saber, que es lo que el capítulo entero defiende: que no hay acepción de personas en Dios, que dispensa todo conforme al mérito y al progreso de cada uno

«No angelic ofÏce, therefore, exists except by merit, neither do powers exercise their power except as a result of their progress, nor do those called thrones, that is, the judging and ruling powers, administer except by merits, nor do dominions exercise dominion otherwise than by merit, and this is the first order, supreme and most eminent, of rational creatures in the heavenly places, arranged in a glorious variety of ofÏces.”» — la fórmula en que lo condensa, orden por orden: ningún oficio angélico existe sino por mérito, ni las potestades ejercen su poder sino por su progreso, ni los tronos ni las dominaciones sino por mérito

«One should think in the same way of the opposing powers, who have given themselves over to such places and ofÏces so as to be principalities or powers or» — y la simetría que impone para el otro lado: lo mismo hay que pensar de las potencias adversas, que se entregaron a esos lugares y oficios

«discerning every single thing with him, until they arrive at the point that they become perfected spiritual beings who judge all things by a mind illuminated in all sanctity by the Word and Wisdom of God, while they are utterly incapable of being judged by anyone.”» — y el término de ese camino: seres espirituales perfeccionados que juzgan todas las cosas con la mente iluminada por el Verbo y la Sabiduría, y a quienes nadie puede juzgar

«We?! think that those views are by no means to be admitted which some are unnecessarily accustomed to inquire into or to advance, that is, that souls come to such a degree of abasement that, forgetting their rational nature and dignity, they descend even into the condition of irrational beings, either animals or beasts;» — la posición que Orígenes rechaza expresamente, y que es la que sus adversarios le imputarán: que las almas desciendan hasta la condición de seres irracionales, animales o bestias

«in support of these claims they are accustomed to quote certain alleged proofs from Scripture: the fact, for instance, that a beast to which a woman has unnaturally given herself shall be deemed equally guilty with the woman and it shall be ordered to be stoned with her;? or that it is commanded to stone a bull that gores;? or even that Balaam’s ass spoke, when God opened its mouth, and the dumb beast of burden, answering with a human voice, reproved the madness of the prophet."» — los tres textos que sus sostenedores alegan: la bestia lapidada con la mujer, el buey que acornea y el asna de Balaam que habló con voz humana

«After refuting and rejecting this perverse teaching, however, at the proper time and place, we shall show how those passages which they quote from the holy Scriptures ought to be understood,» — y la deuda que deja por escrito: mostrar en su lugar cómo han de entenderse esos pasajes

«of angels? those, that is, who have been made sons of God or sons of the resurrection or who, forsaking the darkness, have loved the light and been made sons of the light," or who, after winning every battle and being made peaceable, become sons of peace? or sons of God,» — quiénes son, según Orígenes, los que llegan a la condición de los ángeles: hijos de Dios, de la resurrección, de la luz y, hechos pacíficos tras vencer toda batalla, hijos de la paz

«All’ these assertions, we not only do not accept, but,» — cómo despacha esos tres textos; la frase se corta en el cambio de plana y remata diciendo que, por contrarios a la fe, los objeta y rechaza

«Although everything that has been discussed in the preceding book has had reference to the world and its arrangement,’ it now seems reasonable, however, to revisit a few particular points concerning the world, that is, about its beginning and end, and those events between its beginning and the end, which were arranged by divine providence, and about those which are supposed to have occurred before the world or after the world.» — abre el capítulo sobre el mundo delimitando su asunto: el principio y el fin, lo que hay entre uno y otro por disposición de la providencia, y lo que se supone ocurrido antes y después del mundo

«In this investigation, the first point which clearly appears is that its entire constitution, which is various and diverse,? consists of rational and more divine natures and of a diversity of bodies, and also of dumb animals, that is, wild beasts and farm animals and birds, and of all things which live in the waters; then, secondly, of places, that is of the heaven or heavens and earth and water, and also of the air, which is in the middle, which they call ‘aether’ and of everything which proceeds from, or is born of, the earth.*» — el inventario con que describe la constitución del mundo: naturalezas racionales y más divinas, diversidad de cuerpos, animales mudos, y los lugares —cielo, tierra, agua y el aire intermedio que llaman éter

«There® being, then, so great a variety in the world, and so great a diversity even among rational beings themselves, on account of which every other variety and diversity is thought to have come about, what other cause ought to be given for the existence of the world, especially if we consider that end, discussed in the preceding book, by which all things are to be restored to their original state?» — la pregunta que hace de esa variedad el problema del capítulo: qué otra causa dar a la existencia del mundo, sobre todo mirando aquel fin en que todo será restaurado a su estado original

«and variety of the movements and declensions of those who fell away from that original unity and harmony in which they were at first created by God, and who, being disturbed and torn away from that state of goodness, and then being driven about by the diverse motions and desires of their souls, have drawn aside the single and undivided goodness of their nature, by the diversity of their inclinations, into the various qualities of minds?» — la respuesta que da, ya en la plana siguiente, y que es la tesis más discutida del libro: la diversidad del mundo viene de los movimientos y declinaciones de quienes cayeron de aquella unidad y armonía en que fueron creados

«But God, by the ineffable art of his wisdom, transforming and restoring all things, in whatever state they are, to some useful purpose and to the common advantage of all, recalls those very creatures, which differed from each other in the variety of so many souls, into one unanimity of work and endeavour, so that, although the motions of the souls may be diverse, they nevertheless bring to completion the fullness and perfection of one world, and the very variety of intellects tends towards the one end of perfection.» — el contrapeso inmediato, que es el que da su forma a toda la escatología: Dios, por el arte inefable de su sabiduría, transforma y restaura todo a un fin útil y llama a esas criaturas dispares a una sola unanimidad de obra

«And for this reason we think that God, the father of all,’ for the salvation of all his creatures through the ineffable plan of his Word and Wisdom, so arranged each thing, that every spirit® or soul, or whatever else the rational beings ought to be called, should not be compelled by force, against the freedom of its will, to anything other than that which the movements of its mind directs» — y la condición que Orígenes pone a esa disposición, que es su defensa del libre albedrío: ningún espíritu o alma es forzado contra la libertad de su voluntad a nada distinto de lo que dirigen los movimientos de su mente

«some immense and enormous animal, which is held together by the Power and Reason of God, as by one soul.’» — la imagen del mundo entero que Orígenes propone, ya en la plana siguiente: un animal inmenso y enorme sostenido por el Poder y la Razón de Dios como por una sola alma

«This, I reckon, is also indicated by holy Scripture by that passage, spoken through the prophet, Do I not fill the heaven and the earth? says the Lord;? and again, Heaven is my throne, and the earth my footstool; and by what the Saviour said, when he tells us, Do not swear, neither by heaven, for it is the throne of God, nor by earth, for it is his footstool;? and further in what Paul afÏrms, when he addressed the assembly of Athenians, saying, In him we live and move and have our being.?» — los cuatro testimonios escriturarios con que la apoya: el cielo y la tierra llenos por el Señor, el cielo por trono y la tierra por escabel, la prohibición de jurar por ellos, y el en él vivimos y nos movemos y existimos

«For how do we live and move and have our being in God, except by the fact that he binds and holds together the whole world by his power? And how is the heaven the throne of God and the earth his footstool, as the Saviour himself declares, except by the fact that his power fills all things in heaven and in earth, as he says, Do I not fill the heaven and the earth? says the Lord?» — y la lectura que les da: vivimos y nos movemos en Dios porque él ata y mantiene unido el mundo entero con su poder

«And now, since the argument of the preceding discussion has shown the diverse movements and varying opinions of rational creatures to have been the cause of the diversity that is in this world, it must be seen whether it is appropriate for this world to have an end similar to the beginning.'^» — la cuestión que abre a continuación: si conviene que este mundo tenga un fin semejante a su principio

«By matter, then, we understand that which underlies bodies, that is, that from which, with the inclusion and insertion of qualities, bodies exist. We speak of four qualities: heat, cold, dryness, and wetness. These four qualities, being implanted in ὕλη, that is, matter (for matter is found to exist on its own definition, apart from those qualities we have mentioned above), produce the different kinds of bodies.» — la definición de materia que Orígenes maneja, con las cuatro cualidades que nombra: lo que subyace a los cuerpos, y calor, frío, sequedad y humedad implantados en ella. El texto conserva la palabra griega con su glosa latina

«Yet, although this matter, as we have said above, exists according to its own proper definition without qualities, it is however never found without qualities.» — y la precisión que la acompaña, que es la misma que repetirá al final de la obra: la materia existe según su propia definición sin cualidades, y sin embargo nunca se halla sin ellas

«This matter, then, which is so great, and such that it is able to sufÏce for all bodies in the world that God willed to exist and to attend upon and serve the Creator for whatever forms and species he wished in all things, receiving into itself whatever qualities he wished to bestow upon it—I do not understand how so many and such distinguished men have held it to be uncreated, that is, not made by God himself, the creator of all things, but that its nature and power were the result of chance.» — la posición que Orígenes declara no entender y que va a negar: que la materia sea increada, no hecha por Dios, y que su naturaleza y su poder resulten del azar

«And I am astonished that they should find fault with those who deny that God is the maker of the universe or his providential administration of i» — y la inconsecuencia que les imputa: se asombra de que reprochen a quienes niegan que Dios sea hacedor del universo o su administración providente

«Wisdom, in order that that might exist which formerly did not, or would he have created it inferior and worse, or similar to and the same as that which they call uncreated? Now, I think it will very easily be understood by anyone that neither a better nor inferior matter could have assumed the forms and species of the world, if it had not been such as that which did assume them.» — el dilema con que cierra el argumento, ya en la plana siguiente: la materia hecha por Dios no podría ser mejor ni peor que la que asumió las formas del mundo

«And, therefore, how will it not seem impious to call ‘uncreated’ that which, if believed to have been made by God, is found without doubt to be such as that which is called ‘uncreated’?» — y la conclusión que saca: cuán impío parecerá llamar increado a aquello que, si se cree hecho por Dios, resulta ser tal como lo que se llama increado

«But that we may believe on the authority of the Scriptures that this is so, hear how, in the book of Maccabees, where the mother of seven martyrs exhorts one of her sons to endure torture, this dogma is confirmed: I implore you, my son, to look at the heaven and the earth and at all things which are in them, and, beholding these, to know that God made them when they did not exist.'°» — el primer testimonio con que apoya la creación desde la nada: la madre de los siete mártires en el libro de los Macabeos

«In the book of The Shepherd also, in the first Mandate, it says as follows: ‘First of all believe that there is one God who created and arranged all things, and from that which was not made all things to exist"» — el segundo, del Pastor, citado por su título y su mandamiento: un solo Dios que creó y dispuso todas las cosas y de lo que no era hizo que todo existiera

«Perhaps also that passage in the Psalms refers to this, which says, He spoke and they were made; he commanded and they were created.'*» — y el tercero, del salmo, ofrecido con reserva

«For when it says he spoke and they were made, it seems to be said to indicate the substance of things that exist; while when it says he commanded and they were created, it seems to be said of the qualities by which the substance itself has been formed.» — la distinción que lee dentro de ese versículo: el dijo y fueron hechos indicaría la sustancia de las cosas, y el mandó y fueron creados, las cualidades con que la sustancia fue formada

«reached the summit of holiness and blessedness (something which seems to me to be most difÏcult and almost impossible), or whether they must necessarily always be united to bodies.» — la cuestión que abre el punto siguiente, ya en la plana siguiente, y la dificultad que él mismo le reconoce: si los que alcanzan la cumbre de la santidad pueden quedar sin cuerpos, cosa que le parece dificilísima y casi imposible

«If it is impossible for this point in any way to be maintained, that is, that any other being, apart from the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, can live without a body, then the necessity of logic and reason compels one to understand that principally, indeed, rational beings were created, yet that material substance is to be separated from them only in thought and understanding and that it seems to have been formed either for them or after them, but that they never have lived nor live without it; for a bodiless life will rightly be considered only of the Trinity.?» — la conclusión que impone la lógica según él: fuera del Padre, el Hijo y el Espíritu Santo nadie vive sin cuerpo, de modo que la sustancia material solo se separa de los seres racionales con el pensamiento y ellos nunca han vivido sin ella

«Now, that material substance of this world, as we have said above, having such a nature that accepts every kind of transformation, when it is dragged down to lower beings is moulded into the denser and more solid condition of body, so as to distinguish those visible and various forms of the world; but when it serves the more perfect and blessed beings, it shines in the splendour of celestial bodies? and adorns either the angels of God or the sons of the resurrection? with the garment of a spiritual body,?» — y la doctrina de la transformación de esa sustancia: arrastrada hacia los seres inferiores se moldea en cuerpo más denso y sólido, y al servir a los más perfectos brilla en el esplendor de los cuerpos celestes

«For it is one power which grasps and holds together all the diversity of the world, and leads the various movements towards one work, lest such an immense work as that of the world should be dissolved by the dissensions of souls.» — la imagen del poder único que lo sostiene: un solo poder abarca y mantiene unida toda la diversidad del mundo y lleva los movimientos diversos a una sola obra, para que obra tan inmensa no se disuelva por las disensiones de las almas

«abstruse and concealed (the Holy Spirit explaining the meaning to those who are worthy) about such matters, after many testimonies have been collected on this very idea.» — la reserva con que cierra el punto anterior, ya en la plana siguiente: son materias abstrusas y encubiertas, cuyo sentido explica el Espíritu Santo a los dignos

«It remains, after these matters, to inquire whether there was any other world before this world which is now, and if so whether it was such as this one which is now, or slightly different or inferior; or whether there was no world at all, but something like that which we understand will be after the end of all things, when the kingdom shall be delivered up to the God and Father, which, nonetheless, may have been the end of another world, of that, namely, after which this world began; and whether the various lapses of intellectual beings provoked God to this varied and diverse condition of the world.» — la serie de preguntas que abre sobre otros mundos: si hubo alguno antes de este, si era igual o distinto, y si los diversos lapsos de los seres intelectuales provocaron a Dios a esta condición varia del mundo

«This point also, I think, must similarly be investigated, that is, whether after this world there will be any healing or improvement"— severe indeed and full of pain for those who were unwilling to obey the Word of God—through instruction and rational training, by which those may arrive at a fuller understanding of the truth who have devoted themselves in this present world to these pursuits and, being made more purified in intellect, they have advanced to be, here and now, capable of divine Wisdom;» — y la segunda serie, sobre lo que venga después: si habrá una curación o mejora, severa y llena de dolor para quienes no quisieron obedecer al Verbo, por instrucción y adiestramiento racional

«and whether after this the end of all things follows immediately, or whether, for the correction and improvement of those who need it, there will be again another world, either similar to this which now is, or better than it, or greatly inferior;» — y el resto de esas preguntas, que Orígenes deja abiertas: si tras esto sigue en seguida el fin de todas las cosas, o si habrá otro mundo para corrección de quienes lo necesiten, semejante a este, mejor o muy inferior

«That it may appear more clearly, then, whether the matter of bodies can subsist for periods of time and, just as it did not exist before it was made, so it may again be reduced such that it is not, let us first see whether it can possibly happen that someone lives without a body.» — el orden que impone a esa indagación: para saber si la materia de los cuerpos puede volver a no ser, hay que ver primero si alguien puede vivir sin cuerpo

«For? if it is possible for someone to live without a body, then all things are able to be without a body, for all things, as our former treatise has shown, tend towards one end.? Now, if all things are able to dispense with bodies, there will undoubtedly be no bodily substance, for which there is no purpose.» — y el argumento que hace de esa pregunta la decisiva: si uno puede vivir sin cuerpo, todos pueden, porque todo tiende a un mismo fin, y entonces no habría sustancia corporal alguna

«The Apostle, then, seems to suggest some such meaning: when he says, this corruptible [body] and this mortal [body], with the gesture, as it were, of touching or pointing out, to what else does it apply except bodily matter?» — la lectura que hace del gesto deíctico de ese pasaje: al decir este cuerpo corruptible y este mortal, como señalando o tocando, no cabe que se aplique a otra cosa que a la materia corporal

«Therefore, this matter of the body, which is now corruptible, shall put on incorruptibility, when a perfected soul, instructed with the teachings of incorruptibility, shall have begun to use it.» — y la consecuencia: esa misma materia se vestirá de incorrupción cuando un alma perfecta, instruida en las enseñanzas de la incorrupción, empiece a usarla

«partaker in life, it then accedes to what is immortal, such that it also becomes incorruptible. For whatever is mortal is, by consequence, also corruptible; but we cannot say, however, that what is corruptible is also mortal. Thus we call a stone or piece of wood corruptible, but we do not, however, consequently call them mortal.» — la distinción entre corruptible y mortal que introduce, ya en la plana siguiente: todo lo mortal es corruptible, pero no todo lo corruptible es mortal, como la piedra o el madero

«With remarkable insight, therefore, the holy Apostle, first referring to the general cause of bodily matter—of which matter the soul always makes use, whatever the qualities are with which it is endowed, now, indeed, fleshly, but after a while more refined and pure, which are called spiritual—says, ‘This corruptible [body] must put on incorruptibility, and second, referring to the special cause of the body, says, This mortal [body] must put on immortality.» — y cómo aplica esa distinción a las dos cláusulas paulinas: la primera se refiere a la causa general de la materia corporal y la segunda a la causa especial del cuerpo

«Now what else can this incorruptibility and immortality be except the Wisdom and the Word and the Righteousness of God, which mould and clothe and adorn the soul? And thus it comes about that it is said that the corruptible puts on incorruptibility and the mortal immortality.» — la identificación con que remata: esa incorrupción y esa inmortalidad no son otra cosa que la Sabiduría, el Verbo y la Justicia de Dios, que moldean, visten y adornan al alma

«For, although we now may make great progress, as yet we know in part and prophesy in part, and see through a glass darkly» — y el límite presente que reconoce: mientras se conozca en parte y se vea por espejo en oscuridad, ni lo corruptible se ha vestido aún de incorrupción ni lo mortal de inmortalidad. La llamada a nota que el troceo deja pegada con dos asteriscos queda fuera de la cita, y el tramo sigue en la línea siguiente

«those very things which we seem to understand, this corruptible [body] does not yet put on incorruptibility nor is this mortal [body] encompassed with immortality;» — continuación del mismo pasaje al otro lado de esa llamada a nota

«it is true that this corruptible [body] shall put on incorruptibility and this mortal [body] shall put on immortality, and that death shall be swallowed up at the end, this demonstrates nothing other than that material nature, upon which death could work, is to be destroyed,» — lo que Behr lee en el pasaje paulino, ya en la plana siguiente: que ha de ser destruida la naturaleza material sobre la que la muerte podía obrar

«But since they would not be able to escape immediately all bodily clothing, they are first to be considered as lingering in more refined and purer bodies, which are stronger, beyond being conquered by death or pierced by the sting of death, so that, by the gradual cessation of material nature, death may be swallowed up and, in the end, be destroyed, and all its stíng completely blunted by divine grace, of which the soul has become capable and has thus deserved to attain incorruptibility and immortality.» — y la gradación que propone en su lugar: como no podrían dejar de golpe todo revestimiento corporal, se los ha de considerar primero en cuerpos más sutiles y puros, hasta que por el cese gradual de la naturaleza material la muerte sea sorbida

«If,” therefore, these conclusions seem to be logical, it follows that it must be believed that our condition will at some future point be bodiless; and if this is admitted, and all are said to be subjected to Christ, it is necessary that this [bodiless condition] be conferred on all to whom subjection» — la conclusión condicional que saca, y que él mismo presentará después como hipótesis: si eso es lógico, hay que creer que nuestra condición será en algún momento incorpórea

«to Christ extends, since? all who are subject to Christ will in the end be subject to the God and Father, to whom Christ is said to deliver up the kingdom; and thus it appears that the use of bodies will then cease. And if it ceases, it returns to nothing just as it also did not exist before.» — y su remate, ya en la plana siguiente: cesaría entonces el uso de los cuerpos, y al cesar volvería a la nada como tampoco existía antes

«But let us see what happens to those who thus assert these things. For it will be seen to be a necessity that, if bodily nature be destroyed, it must be restored again and created,”» — el giro con que Orígenes se vuelve contra esa misma conclusión: destruida la naturaleza corporal, sería necesario que fuera de nuevo restaurada y creada

«since it seems possible that rational natures, from whom the faculty of free will is never taken away, may again be subjected to certain movements, granted this by God, lest, if they should always hold an unchangeable condition, they would be ignorant that it is by the grace of God and not by their own virtue that they have been placed in that final state of blessedness;?» — la razón que da, que es la más notable del pasaje: como a las naturalezas racionales nunca se les quita el libre albedrío, podrían sujetarse otra vez a ciertos movimientos, para que no ignoraran que están en aquel estado final por gracia de Dios y no por su propia virtud

«and these movements undoubtedly will again be accompanied by a variety and diversity of bodies, by which the world is always adorned, nor will the world ever be able to exist except from variety and diversity, which can in no way be effected without bodily matter.» — y lo que de ahí se sigue: esos movimientos irían de nuevo acompañados de variedad y diversidad de cuerpos, sin la cual el mundo no podría existir

«Now, as for those who assert that worlds similar to each other and in all respects alike sometimes come into existence, I do not understand by what proofs they can defend this.*'» — la posición ajena que se dispone a objetar: que existan mundos semejantes entre sí y en todo iguales

«respects to this world, then it will come to pass that Adam and Eve will do the same things as they did before, again the same flood, and the same Moses would again lead a people numbering six hundred thousand out of Egypt, Judas will also betray the Lord twice, Paul will a second time keep the clothes of those who stoned Stephen, and everything which has been done in this life will be said to be repeated:» — el absurdo que le opone, ya en la plana siguiente, con la serie entera: Adán y Eva harían lo mismo, el mismo diluvio, Moisés sacaría otra vez a seiscientos mil de Egipto, Judas entregaría dos veces al Señor

«I do not think that this can be established by any reasoning, if souls are driven by freedom of will and maintain their progression or regression by the power of their will. For souls are not driven on in some cycle which revolves again to the same cycle after many ages, so as either to do or desire this or that, but at whatever the freedom of their own disposition aims, to that they direct the course of their actions.» — y el argumento de fondo: las almas no son llevadas en un ciclo que vuelve al mismo ciclo tras muchas edades, sino que dirigen el curso de sus actos adonde apunta la libertad de su disposición

«For what is said by these persons is much the same as if one were to assert that if a bushel of corn were poured out on the ground it could happen that the way the grain fell would be identical and utterly indistinguishable the second time [as the first], such that every individual grain would lie, on the second time, close to that grain where it had been thrown before, and scattered in the same order and with the same marks as happened in the first pouring; which, with the innumerable grains in the bushel, is certainly an impossible thing to happen, even if they were to be poured out incessantly and continually for countless ages.» — el símil del celemín de grano con que lo ilustra: que al derramarlo dos veces cayera cada grano junto al mismo grano y en el mismo orden es cosa imposible aunque se derramara incesantemente por edades incontables

«Thus, it therefore seems to me impossible that the world could be restored for a second time, with the same order and with the same amount of births an» — y la conclusión que saca de ese símil: le parece imposible que el mundo sea restaurado por segunda vez con el mismo orden

«For he says that he was once for all made a sacrifice and he has appeared at the consummation of the ages to take away sin. Now, that after this age, which is said to have been made for the consummation of other ages, there will be yet other coming ages, we have clearly learnt from Paul himself, who says, That in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness towards us.?^» — el argumento gramatical con que Orígenes sostiene que habrá edades después de esta: Pablo no dijo en la edad venidera ni en dos edades, sino en las edades venideras

«He did not say, ‘in the coming age; nor ‘in two ages, but in the coming ages, whence I infer, by his language, that many ages are indicated.» — y la inferencia que saca de ese plural

«If, however, there is something greater than the ages—so that, among created beings certain ages may be understood, but among those which exceed and surpass visible created beings [something greater than the ages], which perhaps will take place in the restitution of all things,'* when the universe will come to a perfect end—then possibly that period in which the consummation of all things will take place is to be understood as something more than an age.» — la hipótesis que añade sobre lo que exceda a las edades: el periodo en que se cumpla la consumación de todas las cosas habría de entenderse como algo más que una edad

«In regard to this the authority of holy Scripture prompts me, which says, For an age and further;" for when it says further, it undoubtedly wishes that something greater than an age be understood.» — el apoyo escriturario que le da, apurando de nuevo una partícula: la fórmula por una edad y más allá quiere que se entienda algo mayor que una edad

«And see if that which the Saviour says, I desire that where I am these also may be with me, and, as I and you are one, so also these may be one in us,? does not seem to point to something more than an age or ages, perhaps even more than the ages of ages,” that is to say, that period when all things are no longer in an age, but when God is all in all?» — y la oración joánica con que lo remata: apunta a algo más que una edad o las edades, a aquel periodo en que nada esté ya en una edad sino que Dios sea todo en todos

«baldness because of your works,” he uses for ornament there the same word as for world, that is, κόσμος. It is even said that the clothing of the high priest contained a plan of the world, as we find in the Wisdom of Solomon, when it says that Upon the long robe was the whole world.®» — el repaso de los sentidos de la palabra mundo, ya en la plana siguiente: la misma palabra griega vale por adorno, y del vestido del sumo sacerdote se dice que llevaba el mundo entero

«This earthly sphere of ours, with its inhabitants, is also called world, as when Scripture says, The whole world lies in wickedness."*» — el segundo sentido: esta esfera terrestre nuestra con sus habitantes, de la que se dice que el mundo entero yace en el maligno

«Indeed, Clement, a disciple of the apostles, mentions those whom the Greeks call dvriy@ovas,® and other parts of the earthly sphere, to which no one of our people is able to approach, nor can any of those who are there cross over to us, which he also termed ‘worlds, when he says, “The ocean is impassable to human beings and the worlds which are beyond it, which are governed by these same ordinances of the ruler God.» — el tercer sentido, atribuido por nombre: Clemente, discípulo de los apóstoles, llama mundos al océano infranqueable y a las tierras de más allá, gobernadas por las mismas ordenanzas del Dios gobernante

«That universe, which consists of heaven and earth, is also called a world, as Paul says, For the form of this world will pass away.’» — el cuarto sentido: el universo hecho de cielo y tierra, cuya forma pasa

«Our Lord and Saviour indeed points out a certain other world besides this visible one, which it is difÏcult to describe and point out, for he says, I am not of this world.* For he thus says, I am not of this world, as if he were of a certain other world.» — y el quinto, que él tiene por difícil de describir: el otro mundo que el Salvador indica al decir que él no es de este mundo

«As we have already said, an exposition of this world is difÏcult for us, lest we afford to any an occasion for the supposition by which they think that we afÏrm the existence of certain ‘images’ which the Greeks call ἰδέας; for it is certainly foreign to our ways of thinking, to speak of a bodiless world that exists only in the imagination or in the unsteady realm of thoughts;» — la cautela con que lo trata y la posición que rechaza expresamente: no quiere dar ocasión a que se le atribuyan las imágenes que los griegos llaman ideas, ni habla de un mundo incorpóreo que exista solo en la imaginación

«exist, celestial and super-celestial, earthly and infernal, is called, generally, a single and perfect ‘world, within which, or by which, other worlds, if there are any, must be supposed to be contained.» — la definición que da en su lugar, ya en la plana siguiente: cuanto existe, celeste y supraceleste, terrestre e infernal, se llama en general un solo mundo perfecto, dentro del cual se contienen los otros mundos si los hay

«Accordingly, some wish the sphere of the sun or moon, and of the other celestial bodies, which they call πλανήτας [literally ‘wanderers, that is, planets], to each be called ‘world’; and also that the uppermost [sphere], which they call àmAÀavij [‘non-wandering’], they nevertheless wish to be properly called ‘world.» — la opinión ajena que consigna sobre las esferas: algunos quieren llamar mundo a la del sol, a la de la luna y a las de los planetas, y también a la de las estrellas fijas. El texto conserva los dos términos griegos con sus glosas

«Finally they appeal to the book of Baruch the prophet as a witness to this assertion, because in it the seven worlds or heavens are more clearly indicated.”» — y el testimonio que esos alegan: el libro del profeta Baruc, donde se indican con más claridad los siete mundos o cielos

«Nevertheless, above that σφαῖραν [‘sphere’], which they call ἀπλανῆ [‘non-wandering’], they would have another, which, just as our heaven contains all things under the heaven, so that one, they say, by its immense size and ineffable span encloses all the spheres within its more magnificent circumference, so that all things are within it, just as this earth of ours is under the heaven.» — la esfera superior que esos mismos ponen por encima de la de las fijas: por su tamaño inmenso y su extensión inefable encierra todas las esferas dentro de su circunferencia

«This is also believed to be called in Scripture the good land and the land of the living,” having its own heaven, which we have spoken of before, in which heaven the names of the saints are said to be written or to have been written by the Saviour; by which heaven that earth is embraced and enclosed which the Saviour in the Gospel promises to the meek and gentle.» — y los nombres escriturarios que se le dan: la tierra buena y la tierra de los vivientes, con su propio cielo, donde se dice que están escritos los nombres de los santos

«made it and holds it together lest it should be mastered by corruption, is stronger and more powerful than corruption—may more correctly be supposed of that world, which we have above called ἀπλανῆ [‘non-wandering’], since, by the will of God, it is not at all subject to corruption, because it has not admitted any causes of corruption.» — lo que Orígenes concede de esa doctrina, ya en la plana siguiente: de aquel mundo que llamó de las fijas cabe suponer que no está sujeto a corrupción, porque no ha admitido causas de corrupción

«For it is obviously the world of saints and of those purified to resplendence, and not of the wicked like that world of ours.» — y por qué: es el mundo de los santos y de los purificados hasta el resplandor, no el de los malvados como este nuestro

«We must see if it is not perhaps in reference to that world that the Apostle said, We look not to the things that are seen, but to the things that are unseen; for the things that are seen are temporal, but the things that are unseen are eternal. For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made by hands, eternal in the heavens.9» — el pasaje paulino que propone leer de ese mundo: no miramos las cosas que se ven sino las que no se ven, y tenemos de Dios una casa no hecha por manos, eterna en los cielos

«When it says those things that are not seen it does not mean the same as 'those things that are invisible. For those things which are invisible are not only not seen, but do not even possess a nature that is able to be seen, which the Greeks have called ἀσώματα, that is bodiless; whereas the things of which Paul says, they are not seen, possess a nature that is able to be seen, but, he explains, they have h» — la distinción fina que introduce entre dos expresiones: lo que no se ve no es lo mismo que lo invisible, porque lo invisible ni siquiera tiene naturaleza capaz de ser vista, que es lo que los griegos llaman incorpóreo

«whether one of them can be approved and adopted.” It has been said that it must be supposed either that it is possible to lead a bodiless life, after all things have become subject to Christ and through Christ to the God and Father, when God will be all in all?» — la primera de las tres hipótesis con que se cierra el volumen, ya en la última plana: que sea posible llevar una vida incorpórea, sujeto todo a Cristo y por Cristo al Dios y Padre

«Or that when all things have been made subject to Christ, and through Christ to God, with whom they become one spirit,” by virtue of the fact that rational beings are spirits, then the bodily substance itself, being united to the best and most pure spirits and being changed, according to the quality or merits of those who assume it, into an ethereal character—as the Apostle says, and we shall be changed?—and will shine with light.» — la segunda: que la sustancia corporal misma, unida a los espíritus mejores y más puros y mudada según la cualidad o los méritos de quienes la asumen, pase a un carácter etéreo y brille con luz

«Or else that when the form of those things which are seen passes away,” and all corruptibility has been shaken off and cleansed away, and the entire condition of this world, in which the spheres of the planets are said to be, has been superseded or transcended, there is established the abode, above that sphere which is called ‘non-wandering, of the pious and the blessed, as it were, in a good land and the land of the living,’> which will be inherited by the meek and the gentle, to which belongs that heaven (which, with its more magnificent circumference, surrounds and contains that land itself) which is truly and principally called heaven;» — y la tercera: que, pasada la forma de lo visible y sacudida toda corrupción, quede asentada por encima de la esfera de las fijas la morada de los piadosos y los bienaventurados, en la tierra buena y la tierra de los vivientes

«in this heaven and earth, the end and perfection of all things can safely and most surely take place, where, that is to say, those who, after the rebuke of punishments which they have endured, by way of purgation, for their offences, fulfilling and discharging every obligation, may deserve a habitation in that land;» — y dónde sitúa entonces el fin y la perfección de todas las cosas: en ese cielo y esa tierra, donde merecerán habitación quienes, tras la reprensión de los castigos padecidos a modo de purgación, hayan cumplido toda obligación

«since the Father is called Almighty, no one ought to be offended that the Son of God is also called Almighty.» — el remate del argumento sobre la omnipotencia en el texto del cuerpo: llamándose Todopoderoso al Padre, nadie debe escandalizarse de que también se llame así al Hijo de Dios

«Several years ago now | interrupted the series of books I was writing to prepare the ground for the next volume in the sequence by undertaking an edition, translation, and study of the fragments of Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia.» — Behr abre su prefacio contando de dónde viene este libro: interrumpió la serie que escribía para editar, traducir y estudiar los fragmentos de Diodoro de Tarso y Teodoro de Mopsuestia. El troceo imprime una barra vertical donde la plana lleva el pronombre *I*

«However, as I continued to study the period concerned, I became convinced that, in order to understand Evagrius and the sixth-century Origenist controversy properly, I would have to go back to take a closer look at the work here edited and translated, Origen’s On First Principles, That, together with my increasing dissatisfaction with the standard English translation, based on Koetschaus edition of the text—representing as it does a curious byway of earlier Origen scholarship, yet remaining the translation and layout of the text that we are forced to use in the classroom—compelled me to undertake this new edition and translation, together with the extensive study that precedes it.» — y por qué volvió sobre Orígenes: Behr dice que para entender a Evagrio y la controversia origenista del siglo VI tenía que mirar de cerca esta obra, y que su creciente insatisfacción con la traducción inglesa corriente, hecha sobre la edición de Koetschau, lo llevó a emprender edición y traducción nuevas

«I have come to the conclusions presented here in the introduction over the course of repeatedly teaching a seminar class on Origen, grappling almost every year for the last decade with the difÏcult task of trying to make sense of this text, which lies, in so many ways, at the heart of subsequent theological reflection.» — de dónde salen las conclusiones de su introducción, según él mismo: de repetir durante una década un seminario sobre Orígenes con un texto que, dice, está en el corazón de la reflexión teológica posterior. El troceo imprime *difÏcult*, ligadura de la fuente

«It might be possible, now, to continue my series on the formation of Christian theology, but I suspect that there is more work to be done on the early stages of the formation of Christian theology, especially on the Gospel of John and a new edition and translation of Against the Heresies by Irenaeus of Lyons.» — el trabajo que Behr declara pendiente tras este volumen: el Evangelio de Juan y una edición y traducción nuevas de Contra las herejías de Ireneo de Lyon

«I am deeply grateful to my students, who were prepared to grapple with the text with me.» — el agradecimiento con que Behr cierra, a los estudiantes del seminario

«I would like to thank Ignatius Green, my teaching assistant during the semester when this work finally came together, for carefully reading through what I had prepared and making numerous helpful suggestions.» — y a Ignatius Green, su asistente de enseñanza en el semestre en que el trabajo cuajó

«Finally, this work is dedicated to Fr Andrew Louth, a long-time mentor in the ways of the Fathers.» — la dedicatoria, que Behr explica: Andrew Louth, uno de los dos editores generales de la serie, es su maestro de largo tiempo en los Padres

«Abbreviations for classical and Patristic texts are those found in the following: The SBL Handbook of Style for Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical and Early Christian Studies, ed. P. H. Alexander et al. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1999).» — la tabla de abreviaturas declara su norma: las de textos clásicos y patrísticos son las del manual de estilo de la Society of Biblical Literature

«Scriptural references have been given according to the LXX; this principally affects the numeration of the Psalms and the naming of 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 & 2 Kings as 1-4 Reigns.» — y la decisión que gobierna todas las referencias bíblicas del volumen: se dan según la Septuaginta, lo que cambia la numeración de los salmos y el nombre de los libros de Samuel y de los Reyes

«Origen of Alexandria (c.185-c.254) was the greatest theological luminary of his age.'» — Behr abre la introducción con la valoración que sostendrá en todo el estudio, y con las fechas que da a Orígenes; la comilla suelta al final es la llamada a la nota 1, que el troceo deja pegada

«He was the most prolific Christian writer, or perhaps any writer, of the ancient world; Epiphanius (no friend of Origen) claimed that Origens literary output amounted to six thousand works, while Jerome derides that number as impossible yet still asserts that Eusebius’ list amounted to at most two thousand works, still an impressive number by any reckoning.’» — la medida de esa productividad según los testimonios que Behr alinea sin armonizarlos: Epifanio, a quien llama enemigo de Orígenes, habla de seis mil obras, y Jerónimo tiene la cifra por imposible pero sostiene que la lista de Eusebio llegaba a dos mil

«They include his monumental Hexapla (an edition of the Scriptures in six versions: Hebrew, the Septuagint, and other Greek translations), texts on Scriptural interpretation in various genres (commentaries, homilies, and scholia), treatises on martyrdom, prayer, and the Pascha, and one of the greatest apologetic works of early Christianity.» — el inventario que Behr da de esa obra: la Hexapla como edición de las Escrituras en seis versiones, comentarios, homilías y escolios, tratados sobre el martirio, la oración y la Pascua, y una obra apologética

«He travelled extensively, visiting Rome to hear the great Christian teachers there, made visits to the Holy Land to explore the geography of the Scriptures, and was called to various councils of bishops around the Mediterranean to expound the faith and to examine the faith of others, even bishops.» — los viajes que Behr le atribuye —Roma, Tierra Santa y concilios de obispos por todo el Mediterráneo— y el papel que le da en ellos: exponer la fe y examinar la de otros, incluso la de obispos

«A transcript of an actual dialogue that took place at just such a meeting was discovered in the middle of the last century: in it Origen is described as ‘teaching’ those, including bishops, gathered together?» — el testimonio con que lo apoya: el acta del diálogo hallada a mediados del siglo pasado, donde a Orígenes se le describe enseñando a los reunidos, obispos incluidos. El signo de interrogación final es la llamada a nota que el troceo confunde con signo

«following century he would be appealed to by Athanasius as ‘the labour-loving Origen’ who had defended the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father, and lauded by Gregory the Theologian as ‘the whetstone of us all’» — Behr abre con la recepción antigua de Orígenes: Atanasio lo invoca como el Orígenes amante del trabajo que defendió la consustancialidad del Hijo con el Padre, y Gregorio el Teólogo lo elogia como la piedra de afilar de todos

«Yet, when the Second Council of Constantinople met in 553 it condemned Origen and his ‘impious writings.» — y con lo que contrasta con esa recepción: la condena del Segundo Concilio de Constantinopla en 553. Behr nombra los escritos con el adjetivo del concilio, no con el suyo

«It was, moreover, its translation that was the reason why, Jerome says, he took it upon himself to attack Rufinus, and it was the controversy that this caused which ultimately resulted in the original Greek text being lost to the ravages of history.» — y la consecuencia material que le adjudica: Jerónimo dice que atacó a Rufino por causa de la traducción, y de esa controversia resultó, sostiene Behr, la pérdida del original griego

«Origen wrote On First Principles in Alexandria sometime around Ap 229/30, by which time he had already come into conflict with Demetrius.’» — la fecha y el lugar de composición que fija Behr, con el conflicto con Demetrio ya en curso. El troceo imprime *Ap* donde la plana lleva la abreviatura de la era

«Origen had been brought up as a devout Christian by his parents, with his father, Leonidas, a teacher of literature, training him in the divine Scriptures.» — la formación que Behr le atribuye: padres cristianos, y un padre, Leónidas, maestro de literatura que lo instruyó en las Escrituras

«Eusebius mentions that when Leonidas looked at his son asleep, 'he uncovered his breast as if the divine Spirit were enshrined within it, and kissed it reverently, considering himself blessed in his goodly offspring.’» — la anécdota que Behr toma de Eusebio y adjudica a esa voz: Leónidas descubría el pecho del hijo dormido como si el Espíritu divino estuviera guardado allí

«The young Origen was also zealously impetuous: his mother had to hide his clothes so that he couldn't follow his father to martyrdom, although the story about his self-castration should probably be rejected.?» — el juicio de Behr sobre dos relatos de la juventud de Orígenes: da por buena la madre que le escondió la ropa para que no siguiera al padre al martirio, y tiene por rechazable el de la autocastración

«It is at a slightly later period, when he had begun his work of instructing Christians, that Eusebius places Origen’s self-castration (Eccl. hist. 6.8), suggesting that he did this in order to avoid charges of misconduct from pagans regarding his dealings with women (though Eusebius also claims that he kept it a secret) and that» — en nota, la versión de Eusebio que Behr consigna sin adoptarla: sitúa la autocastración más tarde y la explica como manera de evitar acusaciones por su trato con mujeres

«Epiphanius, on the other hand, records a tradition that attributed Origen's renowned chastity to the use of drugs (Panarion, 64.3.12).» — y la versión rival que registra al lado, sin arbitrar: Epifanio atribuye la castidad de Orígenes al uso de drogas

«Henry Chadwick suggests that both stories are malicious gossip, Early Christian Thought» — la tercera lectura que Behr suma en la misma nota, la de Henry Chadwick, para quien ambas historias son chismes maliciosos

«She also treated as her ‘adopted son a certain heretic from Antioch called Paul, whose teaching had attracted ‘a multitude not only of heretics but also of our people, though Eusebius underscores that Origen never joined Paul in prayer.» — el episodio de la protectora que acogió a Orígenes y también a un hereje antioqueno llamado Pablo, con el subrayado que Behr adjudica a Eusebio: Orígenes nunca oró con él

«The impression given by Eusebius is that even in the early third century there were a number of such communities coexisting in Alexandria, and that the relationships, and boundaries, between these house churches were somewhat hazy.”» — y lo que Behr deduce de ahí sobre la Alejandría de principios del siglo III: varias comunidades coexistiendo, con relaciones y fronteras borrosas entre iglesias domésticas

«When persecutions began again, under the prefect Aquila (206-10/11), all the teachers of Christianity in Alexandria fled the city, leaving Origen alone to instruct those who turned to him ‘to hear the Word of God"?» — la persecución bajo el prefecto Aquila, donde Behr hace notar que huyeron todos los maestros de Alejandría y solo quedó Orígenes instruyendo a quienes acudían a él

«According to Eusebius, ‘when he saw yet more coming to him [Origen] for instruction; Demetrius ‘entrusted to him alone the school of catechesis’ while he himself presided over the church, and in turn Origen gave up the teaching of grammar by which he had supported himself, as not consonant with divine training, and even sold his cherished volumes of literature in exchange for a meagre fixed income to support himself in his new position.?» — el paso siguiente según Eusebio: Demetrio confía a Orígenes la escuela de catequesis, y Orígenes deja de enseñar gramática y vende sus volúmenes de literatura a cambio de una renta fija escasa

«What we see here, I would suggest, is the first attempt at the establishment of monepiscopacy in the city of Alexandria, roughly contemporaneous with the establishment of monepiscopacy in Rome.» — la lectura que Behr firma en primera persona: ve ahí el primer intento de instaurar el monoepiscopado en Alejandría, contemporáneo del de Roma

«It is really only from this point, when the activity of previously independent teachers (and leaders of Christian communities) was placed at the service of a newly-emerging monarchical style of episcopal leadership, that we can begin to speak of the ‘Catechetical School’ of Alexandria.» — y lo que de ahí se sigue para el nombre de la institución: solo desde ese momento, dice, cabe hablar de la Escuela Catequética de Alejandría

«The establishment of monepiscopacy was not an easy development, nor a quick one.» — el límite que pone a su propia tesis: la instauración del monoepiscopado no fue fácil ni rápida

«We should recall that even into the fourth century, the bishop of Alexandria had more authority over the regions outside Alexandria than he did over the strong presbyters in the city, an uneasy situation that is certainly part of the background for the eruption of the controversy between the presbyter Arius and the bishop Alexander.» — y el apoyo que aduce: hasta el siglo IV el obispo de Alejandría tenía más autoridad fuera de la ciudad que sobre los presbíteros de dentro, situación que enlaza con el estallido entre Arrio y Alejandro

«That Origen was not quite happy with the new configuration is shown by the letter he wrote after his final departure from Alexandria, in which he defends the propriety of studying philosophy and investigating heretical doctrines.'*» — el testimonio con que Behr sostiene la incomodidad de Orígenes: la carta escrita tras su salida definitiva de Alejandría, donde defiende la licitud de estudiar filosofía e investigar doctrinas heréticas

«He continues his letter by pointedly reminding his readers that Heraclas, ‘who is now a member of the presbytery of Alexandria; had attended the lectures of the famous philosopher Ammonius Saccas for five years longer than he had himself» — y el argumento de esa carta: Heraclas, ya miembro del presbiterio de Alejandría, había seguido las lecciones de Amonio Saccas cinco años más que el propio Orígenes

«and that, although Heraclas had previously worn common apparel, he has now laid it aside to adopt the philosopher's mantle and continues in his study of the books of the Greeks.» — el segundo tramo del mismo recordatorio: Heraclas dejó el vestido común por el manto del filósofo y sigue con los libros de los griegos

«Clearly there were other dimensions to Origens tense relations with Demetrius.» — lo que Behr concluye de ese pasaje: había otras dimensiones en la tensión con Demetrio. El troceo imprime *Origens* sin apóstrofo

«It is probably at this period that Origen visited Rome, perhaps to look for a more congenial milieu in which to pursue his studies and teaching, as had many others before him."» — el viaje a Roma que Behr data en ese periodo, y el motivo que le supone: buscar un medio más propicio para estudiar y enseñar

«According to Eusebius, when Origen returned from Rome, he entrusted ‘his pupil’ Heraclas with ‘the preliminary studies of those just learning the elements; so that he himself could have the time necessary for the deeper study of divine things and for the investigation and interpretation of the holy Scriptures’ and teach only the more advanced.”» — la versión de Eusebio sobre el reparto con Heraclas: los principiantes para el discípulo y el estudio profundo de las cosas divinas para Orígenes

«It is more likely, however, that Demetrius was more directly involved in this reconfiguration, ousting Origen from his previous position.”» — y la lectura que Behr le opone: tiene por más probable que Demetrio interviniera directamente y desplazara a Orígenes de su puesto

«Robert L. Wilken speaks of Origen being ‘relieved of his duties by the bishop.» — la voz que cita en nota al mismo efecto, la de Robert L. Wilken: Orígenes relevado de sus funciones por el obispo

«Supported by his wealthy patron Ambrose, whom he had converted from Valentinianism, and who in turn provided Origen with seven stenographers, and as many copyists,» — el mecenazgo que hizo posible la obra escrita, según Behr: Ambrosio, converso del valentinianismo, puso a disposición de Orígenes siete taquígrafos y otros tantos copistas

«When the first few books of his Commentary on Genesis appeared, the tension between Origen and Demetrius increased, only to be exacerbated further with the work On First Principles, Eusebius speaks of Origen departing Alexandria for Palestine ‘when no small warfare broke out in the city.*!» — el punto en que la tensión se rompe: Behr dice que el Comentario al Génesis la aumentó y esta obra la agravó, y cita a Eusebio sobre la guerra que estalló en la ciudad

«But as Origen previously did not leave the city during times of persecution, even when every other Christian leader did so, and as he went to Palestine, taking refuge with Alexander in Jerusalem (no friend of Demetrius), and as he returned to Alexandria only when urged to do so by deacons sent by Demetrius, it is much more plausible to see the ‘warfare’ that erupted in Alexandria as the final breakdown in relations between Demetrius and Origen.”» — y el razonamiento con que descarta fechar esa guerra en los disturbios de Caracalla: Orígenes no salía de la ciudad en las persecuciones, se refugió con Alejandro en Jerusalén y volvió solo llamado por diáconos de Demetrio

«While he was taking shelter in Jerusalem, the bishops of that region invited Origen to preach and expound the Scriptures in public and before bishops. What was normal in Palestine, however, ran counter to Demetrius’ developing sense of the episcopacy, and Demetrius protested vociferously that it was unheard of for a layman to preach in the presence of bishops.» — el conflicto que Behr sitúa en Jerusalén: los obispos de la región invitan a Orígenes a predicar ante ellos y Demetrio protesta porque un laico predique en presencia de obispos

«2. TheStructure of On First Principles I The Two Cycles II The Division into Chapters III Theology and Economy IV ‘The Apostolic and the Ecclesiastical Preaching V Scripture, Book Four, and the Purpose of On First Principles VI Conclusion and the Context of On First Principles» — el índice del volumen enumera las seis secciones del segundo capítulo de la introducción de Behr, que es donde expone su lectura de la arquitectura del libro: los dos ciclos, la división en capítulos, teología y economía, la predicación apostólica y la eclesiástica, el libro cuarto y la finalidad de la obra. El troceo funde el artículo con el sustantivo en *TheStructure*

«At the heart of this condemnation—going right back to Origens conflict with Demetrius of Alexandria; the polemic begun against him by the turncoat Origenist, Methodius of Olympus, in the last decade of the third century; and a few decades later in the crisis that prompted Pamphilus, with the assistance of Eusebius, to write his Apology for Origen;» — la tesis con que Behr enlaza toda esa historia, primer tramo: remonta la condena al conflicto con Demetrio de Alejandría, a la polémica del origenista converso Metodio de Olimpo y a la crisis que llevó a Pánfilo, con ayuda de Eusebio, a escribir su Apología por Orígenes

«followed later in the fourth century when Epiphanius, in his zeal to expose all heresies, precipitated a train of events that would bring about the spectacular falling-out of the former friends Rufinus and Jerome, causing a tsunami across the Christian world from the capital city of Rome to the heartlands of Egyptian monasticism; and, finally, lurking behind the more daring speculations of the sixth-century 'Origenists that were a significant part of his condemnation—lay the book here presented and translated, On First Principles.» — y segundo tramo de la misma frase, que cierra con lo que a Behr le importa: de Epifanio a la ruptura de Rufino y Jerónimo y a los origenistas del siglo VI, y en el centro de todo, dice, el libro que aquí se edita y traduce

«replied: ‘I know not how he [Demetrius] comes to say what is plainly untrue; and gave precedents for this practice.? Origen did eventually return to Alexandria, but his and Demetrius respective visions of the Church were too different for any lasting peace.» — la respuesta de Alejandro según Behr y el desenlace que le adjudica: Orígenes volvió a Alejandría, pero las dos visiones de la Iglesia eran demasiado distintas para una paz duradera

«Back in Alexandria, Origen opened his new work, his magisterial Commentary on John, with the assertion that the true Levites, the priests and high priests, are those who devote themselves to the divine Word and truly exist by the service of God alone; words which Origen later used to describe himself and a piety which infuses the whole of Eusebius’ description of him.”» — la apertura del Comentario a Juan según la refiere Behr: los verdaderos levitas, sacerdotes y sumos sacerdotes son quienes se entregan al Verbo divino y existen solo por el servicio de Dios; palabras, dice, que Orígenes usó después para describirse a sí mismo

«Origen left Alexandria for good probably in 231, to settle in Palestine, where, according to Eusebius, ‘he received the laying-on of hands for the presbyterate at Caesarea from the bishops there??» — la salida definitiva de Alejandría y la ordenación en Cesarea, esta última puesta en boca de Eusebio. Los signos finales son la llamada a nota que el troceo confunde con interrogación

«Here he continued teaching, preaching, and writing, and undertook various trips, such as his visit to Arabia at the invitation of the bishops there to investigate the teachings of Beryllus.» — lo que Behr le atribuye en Palestina: enseñanza, predicación y escritura, más viajes como el de Arabia para examinar las doctrinas de Berilo

«The plural ‘bishops’ is rather odd here, for in later times it became a firmly established practice that a single bishop lays his hands on the one he is ordaining as his presbyter, while the laying-on of hands by many bishops is reserved for elevation to the episcopacy.» — en nota, la dificultad que Behr señala en el testimonio de Eusebio: el plural obispos no casa con la práctica posterior, donde uno solo impone las manos al presbítero

«Eusebius’ words, I would suggest, indicate a transitional phase in the development of the ordination practices, and should probably be taken as indicating the reception of Origen as an elder of the church of Caesarea, though perhaps without any oversight (ἐπισκοτή) of a particular community but free to continue his work as a teacher and writer.» — y la lectura que firma en primera persona: las palabras de Eusebio indicarían una fase de transición, y valdrían como recepción de Orígenes como anciano de la iglesia de Cesarea sin gobierno de una comunidad

«During the pogroms against Christians launched by Decius (250-1), Origen, then in his sixties, suffered extreme torture, being stretched on the rack, to no less than ‘four spaces, Eusebius recounts with horror, only to be denied the martyrdom he had sought in his youth.» — la tortura bajo Decio que Behr consigna con la cifra de Eusebio, y el cierre que le da: se le negó el martirio que había buscado de joven

«He spent his final days, as a broken man, writing letters ‘full of comfort to those in need’ until his death a few years later.» — y los últimos días, escribiendo cartas llenas de consuelo para los necesitados

«On First Principles was a controversial book from the beginning. And it still is, perhaps even more so, as we no longer have the original Greek text.» — la tesis con que Behr abre la sección sobre la obra: fue controvertida desde el principio y lo sigue siendo, y más, porque ya no se tiene el griego

«It is routinely described as being the first attempt at a systematic theology, laying out the theological points that are universally held as certain and speculatively developing those that remain.» — la descripción corriente que registra sin hacerla suya: el primer intento de teología sistemática, que expone los puntos tenidos por ciertos y desarrolla especulativamente los demás

«But before we can consider the work further, we have to deal with the fact that we only have the complete work as it exists in the Latin translation of Rufinus—or rather the only extant version of the work is that of Rufinus translation, for he readily admits in his prefaces that he has omitted some parts of the work and developed others.» — y el hecho que antepone a cualquier lectura: la única versión completa que existe es la traducción de Rufino, quien admite en sus prefacios haber omitido partes y desarrollado otras

«Rufinus began his translation of On First Principles at the request of the Roman nobleman Macarius in the summer of 398.”” However, even by this stage he had already become embroiled in a bitter controversy with Jerome.» — la fecha y el encargo de la traducción de Rufino, con el conflicto con Jerónimo ya encendido

«A few years earlier, Epiphanius of Salamas had launched an attack against John of Jerusalem for his 'Origenism and had uncanonically ordained Jerome's brother, Paulinian, to the priesthood, so that the monastery in which they resided at Bethlehem might be independent of John.» — el antecedente que Behr reconstruye: Epifanio ataca a Juan de Jerusalén por su origenismo y ordena sin canon al hermano de Jerónimo para independizar el monasterio de Belén. El troceo imprime *Salamas* donde se espera Salamina

«Rufinus had sided with John and appealed to Theophilus of Alexandria, who had not yet become an opponent of Origenism.» — y el reparto de bandos: Rufino con Juan, apelando a Teófilo de Alejandría, que aún no se había vuelto contra el origenismo

«Jerome claims that he had intended it only for a private readership, but that friends of Rufinus had bribed someone for a copy of it and were now using it to inflame the controversy further, also charging Jerome with having falsified the original.”» — la queja que Behr adjudica a Jerónimo: la traducción de la carta de Epifanio era para lectores privados, y los amigos de Rufino la obtuvieron por soborno y lo acusaron de falsificar el original

«Now under attack in Rome, Rufinus defended his own theological orthodoxy in a written statement to Pope Anastasius and began an Apology against Jerome. Jerome, in turn, set about writing his own Apology against Rufinus, the first two books of which were written only on the basis of verbal reports about the contents of Rufinus. Apology, and the third after he had finally received a copy of the work.» — y la escalada: Rufino defiende su ortodoxia ante el papa Anastasio y empieza una Apología contra Jerónimo, que a su vez escribe la suya, los dos primeros libros sobre informes verbales

«Despite much bluster, aimed at Rufinus himself, Jerome' Apologies are, it has to be said, remarkably lacking in detail regarding the alleged errors in Rufinus translations.» — el juicio de Behr sobre esas Apologías: con mucha bravata, las de Jerónimo son notablemente pobres en detalle sobre los errores que imputa a las traducciones de Rufino

«I find among the many bad things written by Origen the following most distinctly heretical: that the Son of God is a creature, that the Holy Spirit is a servant; that there are innumerable worlds succeeding one another in eternal ages; that angels have been turned into human souls ... that our bodies themselves will grow aerial» — la lista de herejías que Behr transcribe de Jerónimo, en la voz de este: el Hijo criatura, el Espíritu siervo, mundos innumerables sucediéndose en edades eternas, ángeles vueltos almas humanas

«These are the things I point out as heresies in the books of Origen; it is for you to point out in which of his books you have found them contradicted.”» — y cómo Behr lee el remate de esa lista, que califica de flojo: Jerónimo señala las herejías y deja al otro la tarea de mostrar dónde se las contradice

«Only in Jerome’s letter to Avitus, written some ten years later, do we have not only paraphrases of Origen’s reported teaching but substantial passages in which he claims to be quoting Origen in his own words as accurately translated by Jerome himself.?» — el único lugar donde, según Behr, Jerónimo dice citar a Orígenes palabra por palabra: la carta a Avito, diez años posterior

«In his first preface, Rufinus mentions that Origens books, and especially On First Principles, 'have been corrupted in many places by heretics and malevolent persons, and that his writings are often 'for other reasons most obscure and very difÏcult; discussing as they do subjects which philosophers spend their whole lives investigating to no avail.» — las dos razones que Behr extrae del primer prefacio de Rufino para justificar su intervención: los libros están corrompidos por herejes y malévolos, y son de suyo oscuros y difíciles. El troceo imprime *difÏcult*, ligadura de la fuente

«In the second preface, he repeats that he has ‘taken care not to translate such passages as appear to be contrary to the rest of Origen' teaching and to our faith, but to omit them as being interpolations and forgeries of others, and then further specifies that,» — lo que Behr recoge del segundo prefacio: Rufino repite que omite como interpolación y falsificación ajena lo que parezca contrario al resto de la enseñanza de Orígenes y a la fe de los suyos

«It has, it should also be noted, proven impossible to identify such interpolated passages in Rufinus’ translation of On First Principles. The most that even Jerome can claim is that Rufinus has inserted a passage of scholia composed by Didymus into Princ. 1.1.8.4» — y el estado de la cuestión que declara: no se ha podido identificar pasaje interpolado alguno en la traducción de Rufino, y lo más que Jerónimo alcanza a imputarle es un escolio de Dídimo insertado en 1.1.8

«That Origen’s works were subject to corruption and interpolation is certain; it even led to Pamphilus writing a short text on this very topic, On the Falsification of the Books of Origen, which also only survives in the Latin translation of Rufinus.» — lo que Behr sí da por cierto: que las obras de Orígenes sufrieron corrupción e interpolación, hasta el punto de que Pánfilo escribió sobre ello un texto que también solo sobrevive en traducción de Rufino

«In his work, Pamphilus includes a passage from a letter of Origen written to close friends in Alexandria, portions of which are also included by Jerome in his Apology against Rufinus, translated from the Greek by Jerome himself, and thus beyond suspicion.» — la cadena de transmisión de la carta que sigue, tal como Behr la traza: Pánfilo la recoge, Jerónimo traduce del griego partes de ella en su Apología, y por eso la tiene fuera de sospecha

«I see, then, that something like this is also happening to us. For a certain author of a heresy, when a discussion was held between us in the presence of many persons and was recorded, took the document from those who had written it down. He added what he wanted to it, removed what he wanted, and changed what seemed good to him.» — la voz de Orígenes dentro de esa carta, citada por Behr: un heresiarca tomó el acta de una discusión pública, le añadió, le quitó y le cambió lo que quiso

«Then he carried it around as if it were from me, pouring scorn conspicuously on the things that he himself had composed. The brethren who are in Palestine were indignant over this.» — y lo que siguió, en la misma voz: lo hacía circular como suyo, burlándose de lo que él mismo había compuesto, y los hermanos de Palestina se indignaron

«They sent a man to me at Athens who was to receive from me the authentic copy. Prior to this 1 had not even re-read or revised the work, but it was lying there in such a neglected state that it could hardly be found.» — la petición del ejemplar auténtico y lo que Orígenes confiesa de paso: no lo había releído ni revisado y estaba tan descuidado que apenas se hallaba

«But I sent it, and I say with God as my witness that, when I met the man who had falsified the work, [and asked him] why he had done this, he answered, as if he were giving me satisfaction: "Because 1 wanted to adorn and purify that discussion? Behold with what kind of ‘purification’ he ‘purified my discussion: with that kind of ‘purification’ by which Marcion ‘purified the Gospels or the Apostle!» — el desenlace, con la respuesta del falsificador y la réplica de Orígenes, que compara esa purificación con la que Marción hizo de los Evangelios y del Apóstol

«Once in Rome, and prevailed upon by Macarius, Rufinus set about the task of translating On First Principles into Latin. Jeromes friends in Rome, Pammachius and Oceanus, managed to acquire a copy of the translation and sent it to Jerome, with a letter saying that they found many things in it which appeared to be unorthodox and that it seemed to them that Rufinus had omitted many passages that would have proved the heretical character of Origen. They asked Jerome to produce his own translation and make evident the falsifications and interpolations,» — cómo estalla el pleito en Roma según Behr: Pamaquio y Oceano consiguen copia de la traducción, la mandan a Jerónimo diciendo que hallan cosas poco ortodoxas y que Rufino ha omitido lo que probaría la herejía de Orígenes, y le piden traducción propia

«and they further mention that Rufinus, in his preface to the work, made a subtle allusion to Jerome, to the effect that he was doing nothing other than completing the work of translating Origen begun by Jerome himself?!» — y el reproche añadido que le transmiten: que Rufino aludió veladamente a Jerónimo en su prefacio, como si no hiciera otra cosa que completar la traducción de Orígenes empezada por él

«Wherever, therefore, we found in his writings anything contrary to that which he had himself elsewhere piously laid down regarding the Trinity» — el procedimiento que Rufino declara, citado por Behr en bloque dentro de la introducción: lo contrario a lo que el propio Orígenes asienta sobre la Trinidad se omite o se traduce conforme a esa regla. El mismo pasaje vuelve, palabra por palabra, en el prefacio de Rufino del cuerpo

«If, however, as speaking now to persons of skill and knowledge, he has expressed himself obscurely while wanting to proceed quickly, we have, to make the passage clearer, added what we have read more fully on the same subject in his other works, seeking [to provide] explanation.» — y el segundo movimiento del mismo procedimiento, en la voz de Rufino: donde se expresó oscuro por ir deprisa, se añade lo que él mismo dice más largamente en otras obras. También repetido en el cuerpo

«We have said nothing of our own, however, but simply returned to him his own statements, though said in other places. (1 Pr.3)» — el límite que Rufino se atribuye en esa misma frase: nada suyo, solo devolverle sus propias afirmaciones dichas en otro lugar. La referencia entre paréntesis es la que Behr añade al citarlo en la introducción

«If he appeared to have uttered any novelties about rational beings, since the chief point of the faith does not consist in this, for the sake of knowledge and exercise» — y la excepción que Rufino se reserva en el segundo prefacio: las novedades sobre los seres racionales no las omite, porque el punto capital de la fe no está ahí. El bloque sigue en la plana siguiente

«(since perhaps by necessity we must reply to certain heresies in such a manner) I have neither omitted them in these nor in the preceding books, except when perhaps he wished to repeat in the subsequent books what he had already said in those previous ones and, for the sake of brevity, I thought it convenient to cut out some of these repetitions. (2 Pr.)» — continuación del mismo bloque: Rufino declara no haberlas omitido ni en estos libros ni en los anteriores, salvo cuando cortó repeticiones por brevedad

«It is important to note Rufinus’ precision: it is only with regard to matters pertaining to the Trinity that, if he found anything in the work that seemed to him contrary to what Origen says elsewhere, he omitted it as either corrupt or» — la lectura que Behr firma sobre ese reparto, primer tramo: Rufino omite solo en materia trinitaria lo que le parece contrario a lo que Orígenes dice en otra parte

«an interpolation; whereas if it is something unusual relating to rational beings, he has no problem in retaining the passages, apart from removing repetitions. While on the other hand, if something is particularly difÏcult or obscure, he has expanded the text by including passages from other works of Origen.» — y el resto de esa misma lectura: lo inusual sobre seres racionales se conserva salvo repeticiones, y lo difícil u oscuro se amplía con pasajes de otras obras de Orígenes. El troceo imprime *difÏcult*, ligadura de la fuente

«Jerome also provides evidence that works, or rather a specific work, of Origen had been corrupted.» — el segundo testimonio de corrupción que Behr alinea, esta vez de Jerónimo, y acotado a una obra concreta

«After complaining about Rufinus! bad translation of this letter ('turning it into Latin, or rather overturning it), so masking its real intent of assailing Demetrius of Alexandria and inveighing against bishops worldwide,» — la queja de Jerónimo sobre esa traducción tal como Behr la recoge, con el juego de palabras entre verter y trastocar. El troceo imprime *Rufinus!* por el apóstrofo del posesivo

«Jerome mentions a written dialogue between Origen and a Valentinian called Candidus on the topics of the Son's relation to the Father and whether the Devil can be saved.» — el dialogo escrito que Jerónimo menciona, entre Orígenes y un valentiniano llamado Cándido, sobre la relación del Hijo con el Padre y sobre si el Diablo puede salvarse

«Origen, according to Jerome, ‘rightly’ taught that the Devil is not of a substance doomed to perish, but fell by his own will, and so can be saved, which Candidus then changed into the calumny that Origen held that the diabolical nature itself can be saved.» — lo que Jerónimo atribuye a cada uno, según Behr: Orígenes enseñó que el Diablo no es de sustancia condenada a perecer sino que cayó por su voluntad, y Cándido lo mudó en la calumnia de que la naturaleza diabólica misma puede salvarse

«But, Jerome adds, it is only with respect to this particular dialogue that Origen claims his words have been falsified.» — y el límite que el propio Jerónimo pone, que Behr subraya: solo respecto de ese diálogo reclama Orígenes que sus palabras fueron falseadas

«Although Jerome excoriates Rufinus for his translation, modern assessments are more favourable.» — el contraste que Behr traza entre la condena de Jerónimo y la valoración moderna de la traducción de Rufino

«In the case of On First Principles, we are able to compare a good portion of the work, Prínc. 3.1 and 4.1-3, with the Greek text as it has been preserved for us in the Philocalia, the compilation of extracts from Origens writings prepared by Basil of Caesarea and Gregory the Theologian in the mid fourth century.» — y el instrumento que permite esa valoración: el cotejo de 3.1 y 4.1-3 con el griego conservado en la Filocalia, compilación que Behr atribuye a Basilio de Cesarea y Gregorio el Teólogo

«It is indeed true that Rufinus often expands the text, bringing in further extended imagery or additional scriptural quotations, though it is also the case that the editors of the Philocalia have omitted other passages (e.g. Princ. 3.1.23) for no clear reason.» — lo que el cotejo arroja, dicho con su contrapeso: Rufino amplía a menudo con imágenes o citas bíblicas, pero los editores de la Filocalia también omitieron pasajes sin razón clara

«But when Rufinus does so, it is never to distort the sense deliberately.» — y la conclusión que Behr extrae: cuando Rufino amplía, no es para torcer el sentido a propósito

«What we have just been looking at are no obvious deformations of the text due to a desire to save Origen from accusations of heresy, but the more subtle and often unconscious changes which arise from Rufinus being a product of Latin rather than Greek culture, from his Latin desire for rhetorical embellishment and Vergilian echoes, and from his emphasis on law and the judiciary, rather than on philosophical enquiry and the quarrels of the schools. Of the world in which Origen himself moved and thought it appears from our study that Rufinus was largely ignorant."» — el dictamen de John Rist que Behr transcribe en bloque: no deformaciones para salvar a Orígenes de la herejía, sino cambios sutiles y a menudo inconscientes de quien es producto de la cultura latina, con gusto por el adorno retórico, los ecos virgilianos y el derecho, y ajeno al mundo en que Orígenes se movía

«For better or worse, the Latin translation of Rufinus, with his own forthright admission about his translation practices, remains the text of On First Principles as we have it.» — y el punto de partida que Behr fija para el volumen entero: con sus declaraciones francas incluidas, la traducción de Rufino sigue siendo el texto de esta obra tal como se tiene

«However, the problems surrounding this seminal work of Origen were exacerbated in modern times by the edition of the text produced by Paul Koetschau in 1913, and then by the translation into English of this edition by G. W. Butterworth in 1936, which thereafter became the standard translation for English-speaking scholarship, replacing the earlier translation of Frederick Crombie for the Ante-Nicene Christian Library series (included later in the Ante-Nicene Fathers series).» — cómo Behr data el agravamiento moderno del problema: la edición de Paul Koetschau de 1913 y la traducción inglesa que G. W. Butterworth hizo de ella en 1936, que desplazó a la anterior de Frederick Crombie. La cita se corta antes de la llamada a nota que el troceo deja pegada con dos asteriscos

«Every prior editor, from Jacques Merlin (1512) to Charles Delarue (1733; later incorporated into PG 11), had presented Rufinus translation intact, with Delarue also incorporating, for the first time, parallel passages from the Philocalia, Jerome, and Justinian, alongside Rufinus text.» — lo que hacían todos los editores anteriores, según Behr: de Merlin a Delarue presentaron intacta la traducción de Rufino, y Delarue añadió por primera vez en paralelo los pasajes de la Filocalia, de Jerónimo y de Justiniano

«Koetschau, on the other hand, taking his lead from Rufinus own admission of having omitted certain passages, determined that Rufinus cannot be trusted at all and, convinced that the accounts of Origens teaching given by his opponents, especially the letter of Jerome to Avitus, the reports of Justinian, and even the anathemas of 553, do in fact represent Origen authentic teaching, set about the task not only of putting passages from others in parallel, but breaking up Rufinus translation, wherever he thought he could discern a lacuna, and interpolating into its flow passages supplied from elsewhere.”» — y lo que hizo Koetschau: partiendo de la admisión de Rufino, lo tuvo por indigno de confianza, dio por auténticos los informes de los adversarios —la carta de Jerónimo a Avito, Justiniano, los anatemas de 553— y quebró la traducción para interpolar pasajes ajenos donde creía ver una laguna

«At some points, the passages so inserted clearly twist what Origen said.» — el juicio de Behr sobre el resultado, con ejemplo a continuación

«For instance, at the beginning of Princ. 2.9.1, Rufinus has Origen saying: ‘In that beginning it must be supposed that God created so great a number of rational or intellectual creatures, or whatever the intellects mentioned above are to be called, as he foresaw would be sufÏcient?» — lo que Rufino hace decir a Orígenes en 2.9.1: Dios creó tantas criaturas racionales o intelectuales cuantas previó que bastarían. El troceo imprime *sufÏcient* por la ligadura, y cierra con la llamada a nota

«Koetschau inserts into the body of his text a couple of sentences from Justinian’s Epistle to Menas saying: ‘In the beginning under consideration, God, by his will, caused to subsist as large a number of intellectual beings as he was able to control; for it must be admitted that the power of God is finite and its circumscription must not be done away with under the pretext of praise:» — y lo que Koetschau inserta en su lugar, tomado de la Epístola a Menas de Justiniano: Dios hizo subsistir tantos seres intelectuales cuantos pudo gobernar, porque habría que admitir que su poder es finito

«Origen, as we will consider in more detail later on, contemplates the beginning of things by looking to their end (cf. Princ. 1.6.1); and with the certainty of the apostolic afÏrmation that in the end all things will be subject to God, who in turn will be ‘all in all (1 Cor. 15:28), describes the beginning in similar terms.» — la lectura con que Behr explica el pasaje de Rufino: Orígenes mira el principio desde el fin, y como en el fin todo estará sujeto a Dios, que será todo en todos, describe el principio en esos mismos términos

«Rather than an afÏrmation based on a definitive eschatological end, it has become, in the hands of his opponents, an afÏrmation of the limited power of a finite God.» — y lo que, según él, la inserción convierte esa afirmación escatológica en manos de los adversarios: la afirmación de un poder limitado de un Dios finito

«as it is put in On Faith, ascribed to Rufinus the Presbyter of Palestine, in a sentence given by Koetschau in his critical apparatus, ‘Origen says, “God did not make all those whom he wished, but only those whom he could hold together and grasp."» — la variante que Behr recoge del tratado atribuido a Rufino el presbítero de Palestina, que Koetschau puso en su aparato: Dios no hizo a todos los que quiso sino a los que podía sostener y abarcar

«Rufinus readily states, as we have seen, that he has omitted or reworked parts of the text that pertain to the Trinity, and, indeed, many of the passages supplied by Koetschau to Princ. 1 have a stronger 'subordinationist' flavour to them than Rufinus translation,» — el nexo que Behr traza entre la declaración de Rufino sobre la Trinidad y el color de los suplementos de Koetschau, a los que atribuye un sabor subordinacionista más fuerte

«Here Origen is expounding how Christ is said to be ‘the image of his goodness (Wis. 7:26), describing the Father as the 'primal goodness from which the Son is born; such that the Son is ‘the image of his goodness, for ‘there is no other second goodness existing in the Son, besides that which is in the Father’» — el pasaje de 1.2.13 en la versión de Rufino: el Padre como bondad primera de la que nace el Hijo, que es imagen de esa bondad, sin que haya en él una segunda bondad distinta

«It is for this reason, Origen says, that Christ rightly says “No one is good but one, the God and Father’*» — y la razón con que Orígenes lo cierra en esa misma versión, con la sentencia evangélica a la que, anota Behr, suele añadir la palabra Padre

«Perhaps aiso the Son is good, but yet not good simply, and that just as he is the image of the invisible God and, in this respect, God, but not the one of whom Christ himself says that they may know you the only true God, so also he is the image of the goodness, but not, as the Father, invariably good.» — cómo queda lo mismo en el informe de Justiniano, citado en bloque: el Hijo quizá bueno pero no bueno sin más, imagen de la bondad pero no invariablemente bueno como el Padre. El troceo imprime *aiso* por also

«The possible negative implications are drawn out of Origens position and attributed to him, though with the qualifier ‘perhaps.» — la lectura de Behr sobre esa operación: las implicaciones negativas se extraen de la posición de Orígenes y se le atribuyen, aunque con el matiz del quizá

«At other times, Jeromes paraphrases of what Origen wrote are inserted by Koetschau into the body of the text for no apparent reason.» — el segundo tipo de inserción que reprocha a Koetschau: paráfrasis de Jerónimo metidas en el cuerpo del texto sin razón aparente

«As Origen has indeed been discussing how Scripture presents the celestial bodies as living beings, there is no need for this addition, especially as it is only a paraphrase given by Jerome, who continues a few lines later in the letter by saying, ‘that no one should suppose that what I say is ours, let us quote his actual words.» — y el argumento con que lo muestra: el añadido es innecesario porque Orígenes ya venía tratando los cuerpos celestes como vivientes, y el propio Jerónimo avisa unas líneas después que va a citar las palabras mismas. La cita se corta antes de la llamada a nota que el troceo deja pegada con dos asteriscos

«That Koetschau should prefer Jerome' paraphrase over Rufinus translation clearly demonstrates the level of distrust he had for Rufinus.» — lo que Behr lee en esa preferencia: el grado de desconfianza de Koetschau hacia Rufino

«Butterworth, who in his introduction lambasts Rufinus even more than does Jerome for the inadequacies of his translation, lamely comments here: "The passage is clearly meant to give a true representation of the original, though not perhaps in a strict translation’ (On First Principles, p.62, n.8).» — en nota, el comentario de Butterworth sobre el mismo pasaje, que Behr califica de flojo: el pasaje quiere dar una representación verdadera del original, aunque quizá no en traducción estricta

«These are, moreover, passages which Koetschau literally ‘made up, by stitching together sentences from various anti-Origenist writers.'é» — y de qué están hechos esos fragmentos según él: cosidos con frases de varios escritores antiorigenistas

«Likewise many of the anathemas from 553 are included within the text of Rufinus, as if Origen himself could have written them.» — el tercer reproche: los anatemas de 553 incluidos dentro del texto de Rufino como si Orígenes hubiera podido escribirlos

«The effect of all of this—especially when these texts are presented, in Butterworths translation, under the . capitalized heading ‘GREEK’ (and the details relegated to small print in the footnotes), to give the impression to the unwary reader that this is the authentic text of Origen himself—is to seriously distort the text that we have, beyond any hope of comprehension.» — el efecto que le atribuye, agravado por la presentación de Butterworth, que rotula esos textos en versalitas como griego y manda el detalle a la letra chica

«It is not Rufinus who produced a ‘garbled version of Origen’s work, as Butterworth charges him, but Koetschau and Butterworth himself."» — y la inversión con que cierra el cargo: la versión atropellada no es la de Rufino, como le imputa Butterworth, sino la de Koetschau y la del propio Butterworth

«Fortunately scholarship has moved on. It no longer looks upon Origen as a platonizing Christian, indulging in speculative flights of fancy based upon an arbitrary allegorical reading of Scripture.?» — el cambio de clima que Behr registra: ya no se mira a Orígenes como un cristiano platonizante entregado a vuelos especulativos sobre una lectura alegórica arbitraria de la Escritura

«It has also become universally accepted that the anathemas of the sixth century and the reports of Justinian were directed primarily against Evagrius and sixth-century ‘Origenism, rather than Origen himself.”» — y el segundo consenso que declara: los anatemas del siglo VI y los informes de Justiniano apuntaban sobre todo a Evagrio y al origenismo de ese siglo, no a Orígenes

«In this changed climate, more recent editors and translators of the text have proceeded, rightly, from the assumption that we should begin, as we always must, not with the alleged teaching of a writer, by which we then reconstruct the text, but with the text itself, however we have it, on the basis of which we then try to understand his teaching.» — el principio de método que Behr atribuye a los editores recientes y hace suyo: se empieza por el texto tal como se tiene, no por la doctrina supuesta con la que luego se reconstruye el texto

«Thus the French translation of Marguerite Harl, Gilles Dorival and Alain Le Boulluec, published in 1976, consigned every reported fragment of Origen's text to an appendix, presenting them in a chronological order, to map the developing reports of Origen’s teaching, rather than in accordance with their supposed place within the text itself?» — cómo lo aplicó la traducción francesa de 1976: todos los fragmentos reportados a un apéndice y en orden cronológico, para trazar el desarrollo de los informes sobre la doctrina de Orígenes

«In the same year, a new German edition and translation, prepared by Herwig Górgemanns and Heinrich Karpp, places most (but not all) of the extracts in the space between the text and the critical apparatus, and relegates the anathemas to an appendix?!» — y cómo lo hizo la edición alemana del mismo año: los extractos entre el texto y el aparato, y los anatemas a un apéndice

«Two years later, these were followed by the first instalment of a new edition and French translation undertaken by Henri Crouzel and Manlio Simonetti for the Sources chrétiennes series; they relegated all the fragments and parallels to separate volumes, accompanied» — la tercera, la de Sources chrétiennes de Crouzel y Simonetti, que llevó todos los fragmentos y paralelos a volúmenes aparte

«However, most serious is the fact that, although Rufinus carefully specified that even when Origen 'appeared to have uttered any novelties about rational beings he has not omitted these because the substance of the faith is not» — el reproche que Behr tiene por más grave, primer tramo: Rufino había especificado que no omitía las novedades sobre los seres racionales porque la sustancia de la fe no queda afectada

«affected, the largest interpolations introduced by Koetschau, especially the infamous ‘Fragments’ 15 and 17a inserted into Prine. 1.8, concern precisely» — segundo tramo del mismo reproche: ahí metió Koetschau sus mayores interpolaciones, los fragmentos 15 y 17a en 1.8. El troceo imprime *Prine.* por Princ., y corta en el límite de chunk: la frase sigue en la línea siguiente

«the ‘Origenist’ teachings about eternally existing intellects and their fall into bodies.» — continuación de esa frase al otro lado del corte de chunk: las enseñanzas origenistas sobre los intelectos eternamente existentes y su caída en los cuerpos

«by extensive and detailed notes.” The most recent edition, that of Samuel Fernandez, places the Greek texts that are genuine parallels to Rufinus text alongside the Latin text and places other extracts, as did Górgemanns and Karpp, between the text and the critical apparatus.» — las dos soluciones editoriales que Behr acaba de reseñar: la de Sources chrétiennes con notas extensas, y la más reciente de Samuel Fernández, que pone junto al latín los griegos que son paralelo genuino y el resto entre el texto y el aparato

«None of these recent editors and translators have considered it to be of any value to reproduce Koetschau’s Fragments 15 and 17a, and understandably so.» — y el dato que Behr subraya de todas ellas: ninguna tuvo por valioso reproducir los fragmentos 15 y 17a de Koetschau

«The object of this edition and translation is to present again (especially for an English-speaking readership, which has so far been deprived of a translation of On First Principles representing the advances in scholarship on Origen made since Koetschau and Butterworth) Rufinus Latin text and its translation, as an unbroken whole.» — el propósito que Behr declara para su propia edición: devolver el texto latino de Rufino y su traducción como un todo sin quebrar, sobre todo para el lector de lengua inglesa

«I have followed other recent editors and translators in placing material which is genuinely in parallel with Rufinus' texts between the Latin text and the critical apparatus.» — y la primera de sus decisiones de disposición: el material que es paralelo genuino va entre el texto latino y el aparato crítico

«I have relegated all other material, including Koetschaus Fragments 15 and 17a, to an appendix; they are a historical curiosity which should be retained, even if only as a reminder of the byways of earlier scholarship on Origen.» — la segunda: todo lo demás, incluidos los fragmentos 15 y 17a, a un apéndice, que Behr justifica como curiosidad histórica y recordatorio de los desvíos de la erudición anterior

«I have also taken the step, for the sake of consistency, of placing the Greek texts from the Philocalia (i.e. Princ. 3.1 and 4.1-3) below the Latin text of Rufinus.» — la tercera: los textos griegos de la Filocalia, que son 3.1 y 4.1-3, debajo del latín de Rufino

«There is no real doubt about their authenticity; but this is primarily an edition of Rufinus Latin translation of Origens On First Principles, and, it should always be recalled, the compilers of the Philocalia also omitted sections from what they reproduced.» — y la razón de esa subordinación, con su matiz: no duda de la autenticidad de esos griegos, pero esta es ante todo una edición de la traducción latina, y los compiladores de la Filocalia también omitieron secciones

«Even having accepted that we must at least begin with Rufinus text, there nevertheless remain further, and perhaps the most perplexing, problems requiring attention.» — Behr abre el segundo capítulo de la introducción declarando que aceptar el texto de Rufino no resuelve los problemas más desconcertantes

«As Brian Daley comments: ‘Few subjects have puzzled and challenged interpreters of Origen more than the structure, the purpose, and even the title of his treatise Περὶ apy@v’?» — el dictamen de Brian Daley que cita a continuación: pocos asuntos han desconcertado más a los intérpretes que la estructura, el propósito y hasta el título del tratado. El troceo corrompe el griego del título

«The text as it has come down to us, in the eight manuscripts dating from the ninth to the thirteenth century used by modern editors, all present the text as divided into four books and further supply a variety of chapter headings."» — el estado material del texto según Behr: ocho manuscritos de los siglos IX a XIII, todos con división en cuatro libros y con series distintas de encabezados de capítulo

«‘The division of the work into four books seems to go back to Origen himself, for at the end of Princ. 3 he signs off: ‘we here bring the third book to end:» — el argumento con que Behr atribuye a Orígenes la división en cuatro libros: al final del libro tercero el texto se despide diciendo que ahí lo cierra

«It is possible, of course, but unlikely, that these are Rufinus’ words; Pamphilus, working with the Greek text, also knew of the division of On First Principles into four books, specifying, in his Apology, from which book it was that he drew particular passages.» — y el contrapeso que añade, con el segundo testimonio: es posible aunque improbable que esas palabras sean de Rufino, y Pánfilo, que trabajaba sobre el griego, ya conocía la división en cuatro libros

«The division of the work into four books, however, is not a thematic division.» — el límite que pone a esa división: no es temática

«As Basilius Steidle pointed out, back in 1941, the work is in fact divided into three parts, Princ. 1.1-2.3, 2.4-4.3, 4.4, with each part dealing with a threefold series of similar subjects: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; the nature and freedom of created intellectual beings; and the material world, with its beginning and end, in which their salvation is worked out.» — y la división que sí tiene por temática, atribuida a Basilius Steidle: tres partes, cada una con la misma serie triple de asuntos —Padre, Hijo y Espíritu Santo; la naturaleza y la libertad de los seres intelectuales creados; y el mundo material con su principio y su fin

«Once pointed out, the basic lines of this structure are indeed obvious and have been adopted in various ways in most recent editions.» — y la suerte que le da: una vez señaladas, las líneas de esa estructura resultan obvias y las ediciones recientes las han adoptado

«The further division into chapters is, however, more problematic. As Marguerite Harl notes, despite being extremely audacious' in his handling of Rufinus text, Koetschau was, ironically, very conservative with respect to the chapter headings, reproducing the chapter headings (though only some) from the same particular manuscripts as had Delarue before him.*’» — el problema que Behr sí deja abierto, con la ironía que toma de Marguerite Harl: audacísimo con el texto de Rufino, Koetschau fue conservador con los encabezados y reprodujo los de los mismos manuscritos que Delarue

«Yet the manuscripts differ greatly in regard to the chapter headings. In his introduction, Koetschau lists the complete series of headings found in the two manuscripts he used for his headings, Codex Bambergensis Msc. Part. 113 (B IV, 27 = B) and Codex Casinensis 343 (= C). Yet these manuscripts give many more headings than have been used by editors. For instance, for Princ. 1.2, on Christ, they have no less than seven separate headings.» — la medida de esa divergencia: los dos manuscritos que Koetschau usó dan muchos más encabezados de los que los editores emplean, y para el capítulo sobre Cristo traen siete

«Koetschau held that it was ‘very likely’ that the basis for the division into chapters, and some of the chapter headings themselves, go back to Rufinus, and that their increase resulted from scribal additions over the course of time, a position now generally held, though the . implications of this have not yet been fully assimilated and acted upon.??» — la posición de Koetschau sobre el origen de los encabezados —de Rufino, aumentados después por los copistas— y el juicio con que Behr la deja: hoy es la general, pero sus implicaciones no se han asimilado del todo

«‘There are two other important points of reference for trying to understand the structure of On First Principles. The first is Origen s own Preface to the work, in which he gives a long list of items pertaining in various ways to the apostolic and ecclesiastical preaching; we will consider this in detail below.» — el primero de los dos puntos de referencia que Behr añade para la estructura: el propio prefacio de Orígenes, con su larga lista de lo que toca a la predicación apostólica y eclesiástica

«The other is an external point of reference, and important because it bears witness to the Greek text now no longer extant. This is the report that Photius provides of the work in his Myriobiblios or Bibliotheca.“» — y el segundo, externo y valioso porque atestigua el griego perdido: el informe de Focio

«In his brief account of the work, Photius does indeed speak of four books, and provides brief summaries of the topics covered, which often match the Latin titles found in the manuscripts, though these are typically shorter, and, for some inexplicable reason, what we know as Princ. 3.6, 'On the End or Consummation; is found, according to Photius, at the beginning of Book 4.» — lo que ese informe aporta y lo que descoloca, según Behr: Focio habla de cuatro libros y resume temas que suelen casar con los títulos latinos, pero sitúa el capítulo sobre el fin o la consumación al principio del libro cuarto

«On the basis of various manuscript headings, Origen’s Preface, and Photius report, Crouzel and Simonetti, in their edition, further refined the division of the work into the two main ‘cycles, by differentiating nine ‘treatises’» — de dónde sale la división en dos ciclos que Behr adopta: Crouzel y Simonetti la refinaron desde los encabezados, el prefacio de Orígenes y Focio, distinguiendo nueve tratados

«It will be helpful at this stage to set in parallel Photius’ account, the chapter headings used by Koetschau/Butterworth (those most familiar to the English reader) and schema adopted by Crouzel and Simonetti:» — y el cuadro con que lo muestra, que enfrenta a Focio, a Koetschau y Butterworth, y a Crouzel y Simonetti. El troceo entrevera las tres columnas renglón a renglón, de modo que solo se citan tramos que corren dentro de una misma columna

«in this his statements are often blasphemous, saying that the Son was made by the Father, the Holy Spirit by the Son; and that the Father pervades all existing things, the Son only the rational being, the Holy Spirit only those being saved.» — la columna de Focio dentro de ese cuadro, en su propia voz y con su propio juicio: tiene por blasfemo que el Hijo sea hecho por el Padre y el Espíritu por el Hijo, y que el Padre penetre todo lo existente, el Hijo solo lo racional y el Espíritu solo a los que se salvan

«He also says other irrational things full of impiety; he babbles about metempsychosis, and the stars being alive, and other similar things.» — y el resto de esa misma columna: Focio le imputa además hablar de metempsicosis y de estrellas vivientes

«His first book mythologizes about the Father, and Christ (as he calls him), and the Holy Spirit, and also rational beings.» — el resumen que Focio da del libro primero, con el verbo que escoge para describirlo

«Other manuscripts, on the other hand, have no headings at all, such as Codex Abricensis 66 and Codex Sorbonicus lat.» — el extremo contrario, que Behr documenta con dos códices sin encabezado alguno; la frase se corta aquí porque el troceo mete a continuación el bloque de notas al pie y la remata ya en la plana siguiente

«16322, which merely differentiate chapters by means of an enlarged capital letter.» — el remate de esa misma frase al otro lado del bloque de notas: esos códices solo distinguen los capítulos con una capital mayor

«Besides the article of Harl, it is striking how little attention has been devoted to the question of the chapter headings; only in the most recent edition, that of Fernandez (2015), do all these variants appear in the critical apparatus for the first time.?» — la laguna bibliográfica que Behr señala: fuera del artículo de Harl, apenas se ha atendido a los encabezados, y solo la edición de Fernández de 2015 trae todas las variantes en el aparato. El tramo lleva un año entre paréntesis que dispara la guarda anticosido; releído en el crudo, es prosa del cuerpo y no bibliografía

«and about the incarnation of the Saviour, and that the same Spirit is in Moses and the rest of the prophets and the holy apostles; and also about the soul, resurrection, the punishment, and the promises, The third book is about self-determination; how the devil and opposing powers, according to the Scriptures, waged war against the human race;» — continúa el cuadro comparativo en la plana siguiente; este tramo corre por la columna de Focio, que resume así los libros segundo y tercero: la encarnación del Salvador, el mismo Espíritu en Moisés, los profetas y los apóstoles, el alma, la resurrección, el castigo, las promesas, la autodeterminación y la guerra de las potencias adversas contra el género humano. Las tres columnas salen entreveradas del troceo y solo se citan tramos internos a una de ellas

«that the world was created and is perishable, having had a beginning in time. The fourth book is about the end; that the Scriptures are divine; the end is on how one ought to read and understand the Scriptures.» — el cierre de la columna de Focio: el mundo creado y perecedero con principio en el tiempo, y un libro cuarto sobre el fin, sobre el carácter divino de las Escrituras y sobre cómo hay que leerlas y entenderlas

«What seems a rather random progression of themes in Koetschau and Butterworth is brought into greater clarity by the division of the work into two cycles. But what is the relation between the two cycles, and the topics treated in each?» — lo que Behr saca en limpio del cuadro y la pregunta con que sigue: la sucesión de temas que en Koetschau y Butterworth parece azarosa se aclara con la división en dos ciclos, y queda por saber qué relación guardan entre sí

«Steidle himself, building upon Hal Kochs Pronoia und Paideusis, had suggested that there were parallels between Origen’s work and the contemporary 'school philosophy, in which the basic 'principles were developed in similar, repeated patterns, building up cycles of teaching.» — la primera respuesta que reseña, la de Steidle sobre Koch: paralelos entre la obra y la filosofía de escuela contemporánea, donde los principios se desarrollaban en patrones repetidos que formaban ciclos de enseñanza

«were the works of classicists in the early twentieth century, especially the study on Horace’s Ars poetica by Eduard Norden, in which he explored how introductory handbooks (the εἰσαγωγαῦ for fields such as poetics, rhetoric, philosophy, and physics developed in the Hellenistic period, originating in Stoic circles and extending to middle and late Platonism, and also showed how they often had a bipartite structure, in which the first part provided a summary of the important points, whereas the second part would develop these points from a different perspective.» — el segundo apoyo, tomado de los clasicistas: el estudio de Eduard Norden sobre los manuales introductorios helenísticos, nacidos en círculos estoicos y extendidos al platonismo medio y tardío, con estructura bipartita donde la segunda parte retoma desde otra perspectiva lo resumido en la primera

«Building upon such earlier work, Harl and Dorival argued that On First Principles should best be understood in the company of those handbooks that offer a systematic presentation of philosophy, such as Alcinous Epitome.» — la tesis que Harl y Dorival levantan sobre ese suelo: la obra se entiende mejor entre los manuales de presentación sistemática de la filosofía, como el Epítome de Alcínoo

«Here, after discussing the nature of philosophy itself and its modes of knowing and judging, Alcinous turns ‘to a discussion of first principles [περὶ τῶν ἀρχῶν) and doctrines of theology, taking our start from the primary elements [ἀπὸ τῶν πρώτων] and then descending from these to examine, first, the origin of the world, and finally the origin and nature of the human being’; the three first principles for Alcinous, are, working upwards, matter, the intelligible forms, and God.®» — el paralelo concreto que Behr expone: Alcínoo pasa a los primeros principios y a la teología partiendo de los elementos primeros para descender al origen del mundo y del hombre, y sus tres principios son la materia, las formas inteligibles y Dios. Los corchetes griegos son los que imprime la plana

«The parallels to the range of topics covered by Origen are indeed striking. And there was at least one work from this period that was called On First Principles, written by Longinus, a student of Ammonius Saccas and a contemporary of Plotinus and Origen.”» — y los dos datos con que lo refuerza: los temas coinciden de manera llamativa, y hubo en ese periodo otra obra llamada Sobre los primeros principios, de Longino, discípulo de Amonio Saccas y contemporáneo de Plotino y de Orígenes

«Regarding the two main parts of the work, Harl suggests that the first part is more global, general, complete, and integrated, whereas the second part takes up particular questions for discussion.» — cómo describe Harl la relación entre las dos partes: la primera global, general, completa e integrada, y la segunda dedicada a cuestiones particulares

«Origen has, in their telling, taken a brave new step in the development of Christian theology, by composing a Christian ‘physics, a treatment of the origin, composition, and end, of the world and the human being, drawing upon Scripture, tradition, and human reason.» — lo que, en el relato de esos autores, hace Orígenes: componer una física cristiana, un tratamiento del origen, la composición y el fin del mundo y del hombre, sobre Escritura, tradición y razón humana

«Crouzel and Simonetti, as indicated in the synoptic table above, follow Harl in their description of the two ‘cycles’: the first cycle deals with the three ‘principles’ ‘au sense large —the Trinity, rational creatures, the world—while the second corresponds to diverse points set out in the Preface.» — la posición de Crouzel y Simonetti, que Behr resume desde el cuadro: el primer ciclo trata los tres principios en sentido amplio —la Trinidad, las criaturas racionales, el mundo— y el segundo corresponde a puntos diversos del prefacio

«Charles Kannengiesser, on the other hand, is a bit more sceptical, both of the analogies drawn by Dorival from works either beyond Origen’s reach or after his time, and of the way in which the bipartite structure has been used, for once it has been ‘imposed on Peri Archon as it is, it cannot help but elicit ‘a distinctive evaluation of the “first” and “second” exposition.’» — la objeción de Charles Kannengiesser, que Behr consigna sin arbitrar: desconfía de las analogías con obras fuera del alcance de Orígenes o posteriores, y del uso de la estructura bipartita, que una vez impuesta obliga a valorar de distinto modo la primera y la segunda exposición

«Kannengiesser’s own suggestion is that in fact the first exposition is the work On First Principles ‘proper, corresponding tightly to the series of items listed in the Preface, and that to this original work Origen subsequently added a series of lectures, strongly coloured by an anti-Marcionite polemic.”» — y su propuesta alternativa: la primera exposición sería la obra propiamente dicha, ajustada a la lista del prefacio, y a ella habría añadido Orígenes después una serie de lecciones de fuerte color antimarcionita

«Perhaps more interestingly, Kannengiesser also suggests that rather than looking to philosophical handbooks, a bipartite structure can be discerned in many writings much closer to home for Origen, not least in several letters of Paul, and ‘explicitly’ in many treatises of Philo, Justin’s First Apology as well as the Dialogue, Irenaeus Demonstration, as well as Clement of Alexandria's Paedagogue, though all this without any serious or sustained analysis.» — el giro que a Behr le parece más interesante de esa misma objeción, con el límite que le pone: Kannengiesser busca la estructura bipartita en modelos más cercanos —cartas de Pablo, tratados de Filón, Justino, Ireneo, el Pedagogo de Clemente— pero sin análisis sostenido

«But he makes a valid point in conclusion: ‘It would probably be a rewarding task to analyze Origens double exposition in Peri Archon proper ... with a closer look at its patristic, Alexandrian, and scriptural models, though any such analysis must surely be of the whole book, rather than only ‘Peri Archon proper’ (i.e. the first cycle)"» — y lo que Behr sí le concede, con su propia enmienda: valdría la pena analizar la doble exposición mirando a sus modelos patrísticos, alejandrinos y escriturarios, solo que el análisis tendría que ser del libro entero y no del primer ciclo

«In her estimation, moreover, the second part is the principal focus of the work,» — dónde pone Harl el centro de gravedad de la obra: en la segunda parte. La frase se corta aquí porque el troceo intercala el bloque de notas al pie y la remata en la plana siguiente

«for it corresponds to the programme set out by Origen himself in his Preface.» — y su remate al otro lado de ese bloque, con la razón: corresponde al programa que el propio Orígenes traza en su prefacio

«However, before we attempt to take any such analysis further, we must return to the question of the division into chapters, for only once we have reached as secure a conclusion about them as we can, can we then turn to the question of structure.» — el orden de trabajo que Behr se impone: antes de analizar la estructura hay que resolver la división en capítulos

«Even a cursory look at the chapter headings provided by Koetschau and Butterworth should raise some eyebrows. For instance, where do the headings for Princ. 3.3, “The threefold wisdom, and Princ. 3.4, “Whether the statement made by some is true, that each individual has two souls; come from and how do they fit into any coherent sequence of reflection?» — y la sospecha con que abre esa revisión, con dos ejemplos: de dónde salen los encabezados de la sabiduría triple y de las dos almas, y cómo encajan en una secuencia coherente

«The fact is that the heading for Princ. 3.3, and its placement at this point, is not found in any manuscript at all; it was inserted by Merlin in his edition, and has been included by all subsequent editors.» — el hallazgo que Behr consigna sobre el primero: ese encabezado y su colocación no están en manuscrito alguno, los insertó Merlin en su edición y los editores posteriores los conservaron

«The two manuscripts containing the most headings, B and C, have the heading, "Ihat there is a difference between the Wisdom of God and the wisdom of this world and the wisdom of the rulers of this world, or how one might be entrapped through that wisdom which is the wisdom of the rulers of this world, inserted a sentence before the place where Merlin put his heading.» — y lo que los dos manuscritos más ricos en encabezados traen en su lugar: una rúbrica larga sobre la diferencia entre la sabiduría de Dios, la de este mundo y la de los príncipes de este mundo, y colocada una frase antes

«The very length of this heading clearly indicates that it is a scribal note, not a chapter heading going back to Origen himself, as also does the brevity of this supposed ‘chapter.» — el argumento con que Behr lo desestima como encabezado de Orígenes: la largura misma delata una nota de copista, y la brevedad del supuesto capítulo lo afianza

«Moreover, as Origen makes clear, although turning at this point to the question of knowledge, the subject of his treatment continues to be the work of the opposing powers, as the first sentence of Princ. 3.3.2 indicates, and it remains so until the conclusion of Princ. 3.3.6, as the final statement afÏrms: ‘But let these points, expounded by us according to our strength, sufÏce regarding those powers which are opposed to the human race.» — y la prueba interna que añade: el asunto sigue siendo la obra de las potencias adversas hasta el final del capítulo, como dice la frase que lo cierra

«Princ. 3.2-3 is one complete block, treating ‘the opposing powers.» — la conclusión: dos capítulos que son un solo bloque sobre las potencias adversas

«In the case of Princ. 3.4, although Origen does indeed turn, from Princ. 3.4.2 onwards, to the question of the statement made by some to the effect that there are ‘two souls in each human being, the opening statement of Princ. 3.4.1 makes clear the overarching topic of his intended discussion:‘And now, I think, we must not pass over in silence the subject of human temptations, which are engendered sometimes from flesh and blood, or from the shrewdness of flesh and blood, which is said to be hostile to God» — el segundo caso, resuelto con la frase que abre el capítulo: el asunto anunciado no son las dos almas sino las tentaciones humanas, engendradas a veces de la carne y la sangre o de su astucia

«This simple observation makes clear the sequence of his exposition: having treated, in Princ. 3.2-3, the temptations that arise from ‘the opposing powers, Origen now turns to those that derive from our human nature, flesh and blood.» — y la secuencia que esa observación deja ver: tratadas las tentaciones que vienen de las potencias adversas, Orígenes pasa a las que vienen de la naturaleza humana

«Princ. 1.4, given the heading 'Loss or falling away' by Koetschau and Butterworth, is in fact a continuation of the discussion about the Holy Spirit in Princ. 1.3.» — el tercer caso: el capítulo que Koetschau y Butterworth titulan sobre la pérdida o la caída es, para Behr, continuación de la discusión sobre el Espíritu Santo

«Princ. 1.4 is not a separate chapter, oddly positioned between a chapter on the Holy Spirit and one on rational beings, but a continuation of the discussion already begun in Princ. 1.3.8, tying together the work of the Trinity and the life of rational beings in ways which will be important for us later on.» — y lo que se gana al leerlo así: no un capítulo suelto entre el Espíritu Santo y los seres racionales, sino la continuación que enlaza la obra de la Trinidad con la vida de los seres racionales

«Princ. 1.6, although turning to the question of ‘the end or consummation, is likewise not a separate chapter.» — el cuarto caso, resuelto igual: el capítulo sobre el fin o la consumación tampoco es capítulo aparte

«The ‘end or consummation’ that he brings into his discussion at Princ. 1.6 continues the discussion in Princ. 1.5.3 about whether the variety of rational beings results from their choices and actions or from God himself, and he turns to the end in order to understand the beginning, as is made clear in Princ. 1.6.2.» — y el motivo que Behr le adjudica, que será clave para su lectura entera: Orígenes se vuelve al fin para entender el principio

«Origen opens Princ. 1.5.1 by saying that after having discussed the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, ‘it follows that we should also say a few words about the rational beings, their species and orders and functions, for Scripture provides us with many names of different orders of rational beings:» — la frase con que se abre el bloque sobre los seres racionales, citada por Behr: tras el Padre, el Hijo y el Espíritu Santo tocan las especies, órdenes y funciones de los seres racionales, porque la Escritura da muchos nombres de esos órdenes

«the holy angels (treated briefly in the second paragraph of Princ. 1.5.1, and more fully in Princ. 1.8), the opposite kind, who have turned aside (treated in the first paragraph of Princ. 1.5.2), and then human beings, the ‘rational animals’ (second paragraph of Princ. 1.5.2).» — y los tres órdenes que Behr reconoce en ese reparto: los ángeles santos, los del género contrario que se desviaron, y los hombres, llamados animales racionales

«Origen then continues by showing that God did not cause rational beings to be in these positions, as is proved by further examples from Scripture, to conclude that it lies within ourselves whether to be holy or become an opposing power (Princ. 1.5.3-5), and ends the chapter by turning to the ‘end, when God will be ‘all in all; in order to understand the beginning.» — el argumento que Behr le sigue: Dios no puso a los seres racionales en esas posiciones, de modo que está en nosotros ser santos o volvernos potencia adversa, y el capítulo cierra volviéndose al fin, cuando Dios será todo en todos, para entender el principio

«The organization of the whole of this chapter, and the development of its argument, is both coherent and tight.» — y el juicio con que lo cierra: la organización del capítulo y el desarrollo de su argumento son coherentes y apretados

«The final misleading division of chapters is Princ. 2.1, 2, 3.“The perpetuity of bodily nature’ is not arbitrarily juxtaposed between a treatment of ‘the world’ and ‘the beginning of the world and its causes: Origen specifies in the opening lines of Princ. 2.1 that he will not only treat the beginning and the end of the world, but also the arrangement of events between these two points.» — la última división que Behr tiene por engañosa, y la frase de Orígenes con que la deshace: no solo el principio y el fin del mundo, sino la disposición de lo que ocurre entre esos dos puntos

«By the term ‘world’ Origen understands more than simply the created world in general or materiality and corporeality in particular (which are indeed treated in Princ. 2.1.4-2.2); it also includes the ‘arrangement’ (the cosmos in the sense of the Greek term; see Princ. 2.3.6) of rational creatures in all their variety and diversity, held together by providence as one harmonious body tending» — el sentido ancho que Behr da a la palabra mundo en esta obra: no solo el mundo creado ni la materialidad, sino también la disposición de las criaturas racionales en toda su variedad, sostenida por la providencia como un cuerpo armonioso

«towards unity in God (Princ. 2.1.2-3). Again, Princ. 2.1-3 is a complete block, treating the world’ in all senses of that term.» — y la conclusión del mismo tramo, al otro lado del corte de plana: tres capítulos que son un bloque completo sobre el mundo en todos los sentidos del término

«It is incorrect to title Princ. 1.7 “Things corporeal and things incorporeal. This would again be an odd topic to juxtapose between a discussion about rational beings and one on the angels.» — el penúltimo encabezado que objeta, y el motivo: sería raro poner lo corpóreo y lo incorpóreo entre los seres racionales y los ángeles

«Although Origen does indeed begin with a discussion about bodily and bodiless things, things visible and things invisible, he opens Princ. 1.7.2, with the clear statement: "We have made these preliminary remarks wanting to come, in order, to the investigation of the sun and moon and stars?» — y la frase interna con que lo enmienda: Orígenes declara que esas observaciones eran preliminares para llegar a la investigación del sol, la luna y las estrellas

«This chapter should thus be so titled, or, as he puts it more briefly later on, “The celestial beings:» — el título que Behr propone en su lugar, tomado del propio Orígenes

«Once again, this clarifies the sequence of topics treated by Origen: rational beings, then celestial beings (for the Scriptures do indeed speak of the sun, moon, and stars as being animated and rational), and finally the angels, before turning to a discussion about how all these rational beings fit together as one world.» — y la secuencia que esa enmienda ordena: seres racionales, seres celestes —porque la Escritura habla del sol, la luna y las estrellas como animados y racionales—, los ángeles, y al final cómo todos ellos forman un solo mundo

«Similarly for Princ. 2.10, the resurrection is only discussed, as the opening lines make clear, in order that Origen might come in proper order to a treatment of the judgement, and then, in the following chapter, the promises.» — el último caso: la resurrección se trata solo para llegar en orden al juicio y después a las promesas

«Let us now return to the question of the relationship between the two cycles of exposition. It is clear that the second is longer than the first, and also is often more directed towards erroneous teaching. However, there is a much more significant difference between the two cycles that should be noted.» — Behr vuelve a la relación entre los dos ciclos: el segundo es más largo y más dirigido contra enseñanzas erróneas, pero hay una diferencia mayor

«This can be seen by the way in which Origen opens the discussion of the same topic in each, most clearly in treatments of Christ.» — y dónde la localiza: en cómo se abre en cada ciclo el mismo asunto, y sobre todo el de Cristo

«The correlation between the two chapters could not be clearer, and the most appropriate terms to describe the respective treatments in the two cycles are ‘theology’» — la conclusión que Behr saca del par: la correlación entre los dos capítulos no podría ser más clara, y los términos que mejor describen los dos tratamientos son teología y economía

«This differentiation also seems evident in the parallel treatments of other topics. In the first cycle God is treated rather abstractly, focusing primarily on his being bodiless; in the second cycle it is specified that this one God is the God of the Law and the Prophets and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.» — cómo se repite ese reparto en Dios: en el primer ciclo se trata de manera abstracta, sobre todo como incorpóreo, y en el segundo se especifica que ese Dios único es el de la Ley y los Profetas y el Padre de Jesucristo

«In the first cycle the Holy Spirit is considered together with the Father and Christ, and discussed primarily in terms of the power of sanctification; in the second, he afÏrms that it is the same Spirit who was in both the prophets and apostles, and his treatment then discusses the pouring out of the Holy Spirit upon all flesh and his role as another paraclete, as a consoler rather than advocate, for to advocate is Christ's work.» — y cómo se repite en el Espíritu Santo: en el primer ciclo junto al Padre y a Cristo y en clave de poder santificador, y en el segundo como el mismo Espíritu de profetas y apóstoles, derramado sobre toda carne y consolador más que abogado, porque abogar es obra de Cristo

«In the first cycle, rational beings are discussed in terms of their arrangement; in the second, the focus is much more on the struggles in which they find themselves.» — y en los seres racionales: en el primer ciclo por su disposición, en el segundo por las luchas en que se hallan

«In the first place, we must know that in Christ the nature of his divinity, as he is the only-begotten Son of God, is one thing, and another is the human nature, which in the last times he took on account of the economy.» — la apertura del primer ciclo, citada por Behr: una cosa es en Cristo la naturaleza de su divinidad, en cuanto Hijo unigénito de Dios, y otra la humana que tomó en los últimos tiempos por causa de la economía. El mismo pasaje vuelve palabra por palabra en el cuerpo del volumen

«It is time, now that these points have been discussed, for us to return to the Incarnation of our Lord and Saviour, how he became human and dwelt among human beings. The divine nature having been considered, to the best of our feeble ability, ... it remains that we should seek the medium between all these created things and God, that is, the Mediator, whom the Apostle Paul calls the first-born of all creation.» — y la apertura del segundo ciclo: considerada la naturaleza divina cuanto cabe, toca buscar el medio entre las cosas creadas y Dios, el Mediador a quien Pablo llama primogénito de toda la creación. También se repite palabra por palabra en el cuerpo

«Origen then continues (my underlined emphasis): [Pr.4.] The particular points, which are clearly handed down by the preaching of the apostles are as follows:» — Behr transcribe en bloque la lista del prefacio de Orígenes, avisando que el subrayado es suyo; el bloque abre con los puntos que la predicación de los apóstoles entrega con claridad

«First, that there is one God, who created and arranged all things, ... This just and good God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, himself gave the law and the prophets and the Gospels, who is also the God of the apostles and of the Old and New Testaments.» — el primer punto de esa lista en la traducción de Behr: un solo Dios que creó y dispuso todas las cosas, justo y bueno, Padre de Jesucristo, que dio la ley, los profetas y los Evangelios, y es Dios de los apóstoles y de los dos Testamentos

«This is also in the ecclesiastical preaching, that there are certain angels of God and good powers, who minister to him in accomplishing the salvation of human beings; but when these were created, or of what kind of being, or how they exist, is not explained with sufÏcient clarity.» — el punto sobre los ángeles buenos, otra vez con su abstención: existen y sirven a la salvación de los hombres, pero cuándo fueron creados y de qué clase de ser no se explica con claridad suficiente

«The first point to note is that for each of the four primary items (God, Christ, the Spirit, and rational beings) Origen already makes a twofold statement relating to the two cycles of the work, theology and economy.» — lo primero que Behr saca de la lista: para cada uno de los cuatro puntos primeros Orígenes hace ya una afirmación doble, que corresponde a los dos ciclos

«Second, although Origen speaks, in Pr.2, of ‘the ecclesiastical and apostolic tradition’ in the singular, ‘preserved through the order of succession’ and present in the churches to his day, he does in fact make a distinction, between those things which the apostles ‘delivered with utmost clarity’ and those that they merely asserted, leaving the grounds of their statements for further reflection.» — y lo segundo: aunque habla de una tradición en singular, distingue entre lo que los apóstoles entregaron con suma claridad y lo que solo afirmaron dejando las razones para la reflexión

«This distinction is, moreover, parsed out by Origen in the list given above in terms of what belongs to the apostolic preaching and what to the ecclesiastical preaching. The tradition is indeed singular, but it is comprised of both the apostolic preaching and the ecclesiastical preaching.» — y la consecuencia que Behr extrae: la tradición es una, pero se compone de la predicación apostólica y de la eclesiástica, y la lista reparte los puntos entre las dos

«This distinction between the apostolic preaching and the ecclesiastical preaching is, furthermore, maintained throughout the course of On First Principles. Thus, after discussing the apostolic preaching (that is, God, Christ, the Spirit, and rational beings) in Princ. 1.1-6, Origen begins his next chapter with these words:» — la tesis que Behr sostendrá para todo el libro: esa distinción se mantiene a lo largo de la obra, y el capítulo siguiente al tratamiento de la predicación apostólica lo muestra

«The reference to having treated some matters ‘more through discernment of inference than by dogmatic definition only applies to the latter part of the preceding chapter (Princ. 1.5-6).» — el alcance que Behr da a esa frase: solo vale para la última parte del capítulo anterior

«As we have seen above, Princ. 1.5-6 begins by describing what Scripture asserts to be the case: amongst the rational beings, there are holy angels, opposing powers, and the ‘rational animals’ in between.» — y lo que ese capítulo hace primero: describir lo que la Escritura afirma, con los ángeles santos, las potencias adversas y en medio los animales racionales

«It is when examining the causes for this variation, and understanding the beginning in terms of the end, a discussion which is now already described as ‘the ecclesiastical faith, that Origen changes the mode of his argumentation: “These things are indeed spoken about by us with great fear and caution, discussing and investigating rather than establishing as fixed and certain» — el punto exacto en que Orígenes cambia el modo de argumentar, según Behr: al buscar las causas de esa variedad y entender el principio desde el fin, y lo dice él mismo, que discute e investiga con temor y cautela en vez de asentar como fijo y cierto

«Just as in Princ. 1.3-4, the chapter on the Holy Spirit, where Origen already discusses rational beings in its latter part, before turning to the rational beings themselves in the following chapter, to sort out what Scripture says about these beings, so also, in Princ. 1.5-6, Origen cannot stop himself from also beginning to speak about matters pertaining to ‘the ecclesiastical faith’ by attempting to provide an explanation for the cause of their differences.» — el paralelo con que lo refuerza: igual que en el capítulo sobre el Espíritu Santo, Orígenes no puede dejar de adelantarse a materias de la fe eclesiástica al explicar la causa de las diferencias

«Thus, although in the opening sentence he says that ‘it has been pointed out by us above what are those points that must be clearly determined by dogma, which, I think, we have done to the best of our ability when we spoke about the Trinity, the scriptural afÏrmations regarding rational beings also belong to what is given as apostolic preaching, even though already in Princ. 1.6.1, he has begun treating ‘matters of a kind needing discussion rather than definition:» — el matiz con que Behr cierra el punto: aunque Orígenes diga haber determinado por dogma lo tocante a la Trinidad, las afirmaciones escriturarias sobre los seres racionales también pertenecen a la predicación apostólica

«Similarly in the second cycle, after treating the apostolic preaching (Princ. 2.2-9), he opens the next chapter by saying: But since our discourse has reminded us of the judgement to come and of the retribution and punishment of sinners, in accordance with the things threatened by holy Scripture and contained in the ecclesiastical preaching ... let us also see what ought to be thought about these points.» — el mismo giro en el segundo ciclo, con la frase que lo marca: recordados el juicio venidero y el castigo de los pecadores conforme a la predicación eclesiástica, toca ver qué debe pensarse de esos puntos

«As with the transition in the first cycle, Origen has already prepared the way for the further, more speculative, subjects which he is about to treat, and which he again describes as 'the ecclesiastical preaching.» — el paralelo entre las dos transiciones que Behr traza

«There are three further references, in the appropriate sections, to ‘the ecclesiastical faith’ (Princ. 1.7.1; 3.1.1, preserved also in Greek; 3.5.1), but these two key transitional points, and their conformity to the Preface, are sufÏcient to establish this further level of division within On First Principles.» — y la base textual con que da por firme ese nivel de división: tres referencias más a la fe eclesiástica, una de ellas conservada también en griego, y los dos puntos de transición conformes al prefacio

«The differentiation between the apostolic and the ecclesiastical preaching would seem to be that the apostolic proclamation concerns the basic elements of the Gospel preaching— God, through Christ, in the Spirit, acting to save rational creatures, bringing them into life in himself—while the ecclesiastical preaching deals with corollaries of this apostolic preaching: that, if we are able to be saved, or not, in Christ, we must have self-determination, in the exercise of which we find ourselves in conflict with opposing powers and with ourselves, and that although our end is in the eternity of God, we have nevertheless come into being in time.» — el contenido que Behr da a esa distinción: la predicación apostólica trata los elementos básicos del anuncio —Dios, por Cristo, en el Espíritu, salvando a las criaturas racionales— y la eclesiástica, los corolarios: la autodeterminación, el conflicto con las potencias adversas y con uno mismo, y el haber venido a ser en el tiempo aunque el fin esté en la eternidad de Dios

«The final item from the list of topics given in the Preface is Scripture and its divine character and two levels of meaning. Scripture is not treated at all in the first cycle, and so, I would suggest, Princ. 4.1-3 should not be thought of as part of the second cycle, but instead, following Daley's insightful essay, that it be seen as a distinct section and, in fact, the real purpose of the whole work.”» — la propuesta que Behr firma sobre el libro cuarto: la Escritura no se trata en el primer ciclo, así que sus capítulos no pertenecen al segundo sino que forman sección aparte y son, siguiendo a Daley, el propósito real de toda la obra

«Based on the above reflections, I would propose, and have adopted for the layout of the text and translation, the following structure for On First Principles.» — y el anuncio de lo que sigue, que es la disposición misma de este volumen

«Preface Part One: Theology I: The Apostolic Preaching God (1.1) Christ (1.2) The Holy Spirit (1.3-4) Rational Beings (1.5-6) II: The Churchs Preaching The Celestial Beings (1.7) Angels (1.8) The World (2.1—-3)» — la estructura que Behr adopta para el texto y la traducción, primera parte: prefacio, y una Parte Uno de teología con la predicación apostólica —Dios, Cristo, el Espíritu Santo, los seres racionales— y la predicación de la Iglesia —los seres celestes, los ángeles, el mundo—. Es el contenido de este tomo

«The distinction between uncreated and created reality perhaps became the fundamental distinction in the following century, as a result of the ‘Arian’ controversy, in which both sides could claim precedence in Origen; but, in another sense, it only became primary as theological reflection later on (perhaps only in more recent times) became detached from the liturgical worship of the Church.» — y cómo data la otra división: la distinción entre lo increado y lo creado se volvió fundamental en el siglo siguiente por la controversia arriana, donde ambos bandos reclamaban a Orígenes, y solo se hizo primaria al desligarse la reflexión teológica del culto de la Iglesia

«It is striking, for instance, how even in the last third of the fourth century, and in his work written specifically against Eunomius, Gregory of Nyssa begins the ‘exposition of our own conception of the truth’ by dividing up reality in a way much more akin to Origen, both of them following the Apostle Paul's distinction between things that are seen and transient and those that are unseen and eternal (2 Cor. 4:18).» — el testimonio con que lo apoya: aun contra Eunomio, Gregorio de Nisa divide la realidad de un modo más cercano a Orígenes, siguiendo la distinción paulina entre lo visible y transitorio y lo invisible y eterno

«Now, the ultimate division of all being is into the intellectual and the perceptible [Πάντων τῶν ὄντων ἡ ἀνωτάτω διαίρεσις εἴς TE τὸ νοητὸν καὶ τὸ αἰσθητὸν τὴν τομὴν ἔχει]: the perceptible nature is called by the Apostle that which is seen. For as all body has colour, and the sight apprehends this, he calls this world by the rough and ready name of that which is seen ... The common term, again for the intellectual world, is with the apostle, that which is not seen: by withdrawing all idea of comprehension by the senses he leads the mind [διάνοιαν on to the immaterial and intellectual.» — el pasaje de Gregorio que Behr transcribe: la división última de todo lo que es corre entre lo intelectual y lo perceptible, y el Apóstol llama a lo perceptible lo que se ve y a lo intelectual lo que no se ve. Los corchetes con griego son los que imprime la plana

«Reason [6 Adyos] again divides this which is not seen into the uncreated and the created, inferentially comprehending it: the uncreated being that which effects the creation, the creation that which owes its origin and its force to the uncreated.» — y el segundo corte dentro de ese mismo pasaje: la razón divide lo no visto en increado y creado, siendo lo increado lo que efectúa la creación. El troceo corrompe el griego en *6 Adyos*

«The distinction between the uncreated and the created finds its place within the overarching apostolic distinction between the seen and transient, on the one hand, and the unseen and eternal, on the other. Rational beings, as intellects, clearly fall within the latter, along with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.» — lo que Behr concluye de Gregorio para su propia lectura: la distinción entre increado y creado cabe dentro de la apostólica entre lo visto y transitorio y lo no visto y eterno, y los seres racionales, como intelectos, caen del lado segundo junto al Padre, el Hijo y el Espíritu Santo

«Then, again, that Jesus Christ himself, who came, was born of the Father before all creatures. After ministering to the Father in the foundation of all things, for by him were all things made, in the last times, emptying himself, he became human and was incarnate ...» — el segundo punto: Jesucristo nacido del Padre antes de todas las criaturas, ministro del Padre en la fundación de todas las cosas, y en los últimos tiempos vaciado de sí, hecho hombre y encarnado. Los puntos suspensivos son los de Behr, y el pasaje vuelve en el cuerpo

«Then, again, they handed down that the Holy Spirit is associated in honour and dignity with the Father and the Son. But in this case it is not yet clearly discerned whether he is born or not-born, or whether he is to be considered as himself Son of God or not: but these are points which are yet to be inquired into, to the best of our ability, from holy Scripture, and investigated with the requisite wisdom.» — el tercer punto, con la abstención que lleva dentro: el Espíritu Santo asociado en honor y dignidad al Padre y al Hijo, pero sin discernirse aún si es nacido o no nacido, ni si ha de tenerse por Hijo de Dios, cuestiones que quedan por investigar desde la Escritura. Repetido en el cuerpo

«That this Holy Spirit inspired each one of the saints, both the prophets and the apostles, and that there was not one Spirit in those of old but another in those who were inspired at the coming of Christ, is indeed most clearly taught throughout the churches.» — y lo que del Espíritu sí se enseña con claridad en las iglesias: que inspiró a cada uno de los santos, profetas y apóstoles, y que no hubo un Espíritu en los antiguos y otro en los inspirados a la venida de Cristo. Repetido en el cuerpo

«After these points, also, that the soul, having its own substance and life, shall, after it departs from this world, obtain an inheritance of eternal life and blessedness, if its actions shall have excelled, or be delivered up to eternal fire and torments, if the sin of its wicked deeds shall so direct it: and also, that there is to be a time of resurrection from the dead, when this body, which now is sown in corruption, shall rise in incorruptibility, and that which is sown in dishonour, will rise in glory.» — el punto sobre el alma y la resurrección: el alma con sustancia y vida propias recibe herencia de vida eterna o es entregada al fuego según sus obras, y el cuerpo sembrado en corrupción resucita en incorrupción. Repetido en el cuerpo

«This also is defined in the ecclesiastical preaching, that every rational soul possesses free-will and volition; that it is in conflict against the devil and his angels, and opposing powers, because they strive to burden it with sins; but if we live rightly and carefully, we should endeavour to shake off such a burden. ...» — el punto sobre el libre albedrío, que la lista adscribe a la predicación eclesiástica: toda alma racional tiene libre albedrío y voluntad, y está en conflicto con el diablo, sus ángeles y las potencias adversas. Repetido en el cuerpo

«Regarding the devil and his angels and the opposing powers, the ecclesiastical preaching has taught that they indeed exist, but what they are, or how they exist, it has not explained sufÏciently clearly. ...» — y la abstención expresa que la acompaña: la predicación eclesiástica enseña que existen, pero no explica con claridad suficiente qué son ni cómo existen. Repetido en el cuerpo

«This also is part of the ecclesiastical preaching, that this world was made and began at a certain time and, because it is corruptible, will be dissolved. But what existed before this world, or what will exist after it, has not yet become known openly to many, for no clear statement on this is set forth in the» — el punto sobre el mundo, con su límite: hecho y comenzado en cierto tiempo, y corruptible, se disolverá; lo que hubo antes o habrá después no se ha hecho notorio a muchos. La frase se corta donde el troceo interrumpe el bloque, y el pasaje vuelve en el cuerpo

«Then, finally, that the Scriptures were written by the Spirit of God, and that they have not only the meaning which is obvious, but also another which escapes the notice of most. ...» — el punto sobre la Escritura, que Behr tendrá por el propósito real de toda la obra: escrita por el Espíritu de Dios, tiene el sentido obvio y otro que a los más se les escapa. Repetido en el cuerpo

«Regarding the sun, moon, and stars, whether they are animated beings or inanimate is not clearly handed down.» — y la última abstención de la lista, que Behr usará después: si el sol, la luna y las estrellas son seres animados o inanimados no se transmite con claridad. Repetido en el cuerpo

«The matters, then, which we have examined above, were considered by us in a more general manner, treating and discussing rational natures, more through discernment of inference than by dogmatic definition, after the place where we spoke, to the best of our ability, of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Let us now, therefore, consider those matters that it is appropriate to discuss in the following pages, according to our teaching, that is, according to the faith of the Church.» — el pasaje con que lo prueba: lo anterior se trató de manera general, más por discernimiento de inferencia que por definición dogmática, y ahora toca lo que corresponde a la enseñanza propia, es decir, a la fe de la Iglesia. El mismo pasaje vuelve en el cuerpo

«But it is only in Princ. 1.7.1 that he definitively turns to ‘our teaching, that is,» — dónde se produce el giro definitivo a la enseñanza propia; la frase se corta en el cambio de plana y remata con la fe de la Iglesia

«Part Two: Economy I: The Apostolic Preaching That the God of the Law and the Prophets and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is one (2.4-5) The Incarnation of Christ (2.6) The Holy Spirit (2.7) The Soul (2.8) The World and Movements of Rational Creatures (2.9) II: The Church’s Preaching The Judgement (2.10) The Promises (2.11)» — y el resto de esa misma estructura, que corresponde al tomo segundo y no entra en el corpus: la Parte Dos de economía, con su predicación apostólica y su predicación de la Iglesia

«Free Will (3.1) 1: On Free Will (3.1.2-6) 2: DifÏcult Passages in Scripture (3.1.7-24) The Opposing Powers (3.2-3) On Human Temptations (3.4) That the World began in Time and Expects an End (3.5) The Consummation (3.6) Part Three: The Inspired Scripture That the Scriptures are Divinely Inspired (4.1) How One Must Read and Understand the Scriptures (4.2-3) Recapitulation (4.4)» — el cierre de esa tabla, también del tomo segundo: el libre albedrío, las potencias adversas, las tentaciones humanas, el principio y el fin del mundo, la consumación, y una Parte Tres sobre las Escrituras inspiradas con su recapitulación

«The most important implication of taking On First Principles as structured in this manner is that the basic division is nof between God, on the one hand, and creation (rational and otherwise) on the other, as it would come to be in later» — la implicación que Behr tiene por más importante, primer tramo: la división básica no corre entre Dios y la creación, racional o no. El troceo imprime *nof* por not, y la frase sigue en la plana siguiente

«precedence, and as it is in the structuring of the opening chapters in other editions of this work. Rather, rational beings are taken together with God, Christ, the Holy Spirit as the four elements of the apostolic preaching» — y su remate: los seres racionales van junto a Dios, Cristo y el Espíritu Santo como los cuatro elementos de la predicación apostólica. El tramo se corta en el límite de chunk

«how indeed could it be otherwise, given that it is preaching—there must be hearers ready to hear the good news) and reflected upon first on a theological level and then an economic level.» — continuación al otro lado del corte, con el argumento de Behr: no podría ser de otro modo, porque para que haya predicación tiene que haber oyentes dispuestos a oír la buena nueva, y esos cuatro se leen primero en clave teológica y luego económica

«Origen’s monotheism, then, is not that of later philosophical deism (not even a Trinitarian deism), with God considered in or by himself (or as three), prior to and independent of rational beings. It is rather a biblical monarchical monotheism, in which God is seen as presiding over the heavenly court, in the celebration of the heavenly liturgy: ‘God is in the congregation of gods» — la tesis de Behr sobre el monoteísmo de Orígenes: no el deísmo filosófico posterior, con Dios considerado en sí mismo antes y con independencia de los seres racionales, sino un monoteísmo monárquico bíblico donde Dios preside la corte celeste en la liturgia del cielo

«This is the vision of God that pervades the Scriptures, throughout the Old Testament, and even increasing in the literature of Second Temple Judaism and apocalyptic works, to the New Testament proclamation that the crucified and risen Christ has been exalted to sit at the right hand of the Majesty on high (Heb. 1:3), in the throne room beheld by John in his Apocalypse, in which the One who sits on the throne and the slain Lamb are offered ‘blessing and honour and glory and might unto the ages of ages’ (Rev. 5:13).”4» — y el arco escriturario con que la respalda: del Antiguo Testamento al judaísmo del Segundo Templo y la literatura apocalíptica, y de ahí al Cristo exaltado a la diestra de la Majestad y a la sala del trono del Apocalipsis

«It is also the vision of God experienced by Christians in their worship upon earth, where the heavenly and earthly liturgy coincide. It is captured most concisely in the preface to the anaphora of Basil the Great:» — el segundo lugar donde Behr sitúa esa visión: el culto de los cristianos en la tierra, donde coinciden la liturgia celeste y la terrestre, y que él ve condensado en el prefacio de la anáfora de Basilio

«Master, the One who is, Lord, God, Father, Almighty, who are to be worshipped, it is truly right and proper and fitting the majesty of your holiness to praise you, to hymn you, to bless you, and to worship you, to thank you, to glorify you, the only God who truly exists; to offer you with a broken heart and a spirit of humility, this our reasonable worship.» — la anáfora que Behr transcribe, en la traducción del archimandrita Efrén Lash: el único Dios que verdaderamente existe, a quien se ofrece con corazón quebrantado y espíritu de humildad el culto racional

«For it is you who have granted us the knowledge of your truth. And who is able to tell of all your acts of power? To make all your praises heard or to recount all your wonders at every moment? Master of all things, Lord of heaven and earth and all creation, seen and unseen, who are seated on a throne» — continuación de esa anáfora, donde el conocimiento de la verdad se declara don del mismo Dios, Señor del cielo, de la tierra y de toda la creación visible e invisible

«of glory and look upon the deeps, without beginning invisible, unsearchable, uncircumscribed, unchangeable,» — el remate del primer miembro de la anáfora al otro lado del corte de plana, con los atributos divinos: sin principio, invisible, inescrutable, incircunscrito, inmutable

«the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the great God and Saviour, our hope, who is the image of your goodness, perfect seal of your likeness, revealing you the Father in himself, living Word, true God, pre-eternal Wisdom, Life, Sanctification, Power, the true Light,» — el segundo miembro, sobre el Hijo: imagen de la bondad del Padre, sello perfecto de su semejanza, Verbo viviente, Sabiduría preeterna, Vida, Santificación, Poder, Luz verdadera

«through whom the Holy Spirit was made manifest, the Spirit of truth, the grace of sonship, the pledge of the inheritance to come, the first-fruits of the eternal good things, the life-giving power, the source of sanctification,» — el tercer miembro, sobre el Espíritu: Espíritu de verdad, gracia de la filiación, prenda de la herencia futura, primicia de los bienes eternos, poder vivificante, fuente de santificación

«through whom every rational and intelligent being is empowered, worships you and ascribes to you the everlasting [ἀΐδιον] hymn of glory, because all things are your servants.”» — y el cuarto, que es el que Behr necesita: por el Espíritu, todo ser racional e inteligente es capacitado para adorar y ofrecer el himno perpetuo de gloria. El corchete con griego es el que imprime la plana

«In this tapestry of Scriptural allusions, the God and Father, Christ, his Son and our great God and Saviour, the Holy Spirit, and all rational and intellectual beings are held together in the flow of one continuous sentence, expressing one movement from God, through Christ, through the Spirit, through whom all rational beings, in return, send forth praise to God.» — lo que Behr lee en ese tejido de alusiones: Padre, Hijo, Espíritu y todos los seres racionales sostenidos en una sola frase continua, un movimiento que va de Dios por Cristo y por el Espíritu y vuelve como alabanza

«It is, moreover, an ‘everlasting, or more strictly timeless, hymn that the servants of God— creatures, who have come into being in time, distinct from the uncreated God-——-offer to their Lord.» — y el matiz que subraya: el himno es perpetuo, o más estrictamente sin tiempo, y lo ofrecen criaturas que vinieron a ser en el tiempo, distintas del Dios increado

«The distinction between the apostolic and the ecclesiastical preaching, with its placement of rational beings together with God, Christ, and the Spirit, brings us into some of the thorniest problems of interpreting Origen’s theology: the idea that he taught that rational beings exist eternally, before and outside of creation, and that, through satiety or sloth, they fell into the various ranks of increasingly dense bodies—ideas that were (rightly!) anathematized in the sixth century.» — el problema que Behr anuncia como el más espinoso, y donde firma su propia posición con signo de admiración: la idea de que enseñó seres racionales eternos anteriores a la creación, caídos por hartazgo o pereza en cuerpos cada vez más densos, ideas que fueron anatematizadas en el siglo VI

«Much of the problem with the title derives from the ambiguity of the term ‘principle’ (ἀρχή), an ambiguity noted by Rufinus in his first preface: he suggests that it can be translated either by ‘principle’ (principium) or by ‘principality’ (principatus).» — de dónde viene el problema del título, según Behr: la ambigüedad del término principio, que el propio Rufino señala en su primer prefacio al ofrecer dos traducciones latinas

«While nineteenth- and early twentieth-century scholars took the title of Origen's work in the first sense, as providing the fundamental axioms of a theological system, some clearly stated, others to be worked out, more recent scholars, as we have seen, took the title in the second sense, so that the work is understood, in the company of other introductory handbooks, as treating the primary realities of God and beings.» — cómo se repartieron los estudiosos entre esos dos sentidos: los del siglo XIX y principios del XX por el lógico, los recientes por el ontológico

«Daley helpfully suggests, instead, that the title 'bears an ambiguity of reference Origen may well have intended: constructing a cohesive survey of the ontological principles of the world's beings, as Christian faith perceives them, also brings together for him, the logical principles for an understanding of the content of revelation that is both the anchor and the starting point of authentic and creative biblical interpretation"» — la salida que Behr adopta de Daley: el título lleva una ambigüedad que Orígenes bien pudo querer, porque el repaso de los principios ontológicos le da a la vez los principios lógicos para entender la revelación

«The advantage of this approach is that it enables us to understand the place of Origen’s treatment of Scripture (Princ. 4.1-3), following the two cycles of theological and economic interpretation of the content of the apostolic and the ecclesiastical preaching.» — y la ventaja que Behr le encuentra: permite situar el tratamiento de la Escritura después de los dos ciclos

«everyone who desires to construct a certain structure and a body of all these things, in accordance with reason, must make use of elements and foundations [probably: στοιχείοις καὶ ἀρχαῖς] of this sort ... that by clear and cogent arguments the truth about each particular point may be discovered, and he may form, as we have said, one body, by means of illustrations and assertions, either those which he came upon in the holy Scriptures or those which he discovered to follow by investigation and right reason. (Pr.10)» — el cierre del prefacio de Orígenes que Behr cita: quien quiera construir una estructura y un cuerpo de todas estas cosas ha de usar elementos y fundamentos de ese tipo, formando un solo cuerpo con lo hallado en las Escrituras y lo que se sigue por investigación y recta razón. El corchete con griego es de Behr

«As Daley observes, Origen clearly sees himself as building, out of what he has found in Scripture and what follows on from this, ‘the kind of integrated, demonstrative, logically coherent system of knowledge that in the Aristotelian tradition was called a science (ἐπιστήμη).» — lo que Behr y Daley leen ahí: Orígenes se ve construyendo el tipo de sistema integrado y demostrativo que la tradición aristotélica llamaba ciencia

«Aristotle's account of knowledge (ἐπιστήμη) was largely appropriated by later philosophy and incorporated into the handbooks of philosophy, contemporary with Origen.» — la transmisión que Behr traza: la explicación aristotélica del conocimiento pasó a la filosofía posterior y a los manuales contemporáneos de Orígenes

«In the face of the Sceptics, it also became a matter of necessity to begin any systematic presentation of philosophy with an account of the ‘criterion’ or ‘canon, which, as we have seen above, is what Alcinous does; Origen also appeals to the canon in his Preface.» — y por qué el criterio se volvió obligatorio: frente a los escépticos, toda exposición sistemática tenía que empezar por el criterio o canon, como hace Alcínoo, y Orígenes apela al canon en su prefacio

«Without a criterion or canon, knowledge is simply not possible, for all inquiry will be drawn helplessly into an infinite regression. Epicurus Canon seems to have been the first work devoted to establishing ‘the criteria of truth.» — la razón que da y el antecedente que nombra: sin criterio toda indagación cae en regresión infinita, y el Canon de Epicuro parece haber sido el primer tratado dedicado a los criterios de verdad

«In Hellenistic philosophy, it was generally held that it is preconceptions (apdéAnyers—generic notions synthesized out of repeated sense perceptions, later held to be innate) that facilitate knowledge and act as criteria.» — la solución helenística que Behr resume: las preconcepciones, nociones genéricas sintetizadas de percepciones repetidas y después tenidas por innatas, hacen posible el conocimiento y hacen de criterio

«The self-evidence (ἐνάργεια) of the sense perceptions, for the Epicureans, and the clarity of cognitive impressions, for the Stoics, provide the infallible criterion for examining what truly exists, though, as Clement of Alexandria points out, even Epicurus accepted that this ‘preconception of the intellect’ is ‘faith, and that without it, neither inquiry nor judgement is possible.» — los dos criterios rivales y el giro que a Behr le importa: la evidencia de las percepciones para los epicúreos y la claridad de las impresiones para los estoicos, y la observación de Clemente de Alejandría de que hasta Epicuro llamaba fe a esa preconcepción del intelecto

«Returning to Aristotle, the knowledge he is speaking about is also connected to wisdom. Daley highlights a passage from the Magna Moralia attributed to Aristotle (expanding a point made briefly in the Nichomachean Ethics) explaining how wisdom combines both intellect or intuitive knowledge and knowledge (ἐπιστήμη).» — el enlace con la sabiduría que Behr toma de un pasaje de la Magna moralia atribuida a Aristóteles: la sabiduría combina intelecto y conocimiento

«While the intellect deals with the first principles of things intelligible and existent, knowledge (ἐπιστήμη) deals with what can be demonstrated, as the first principles themselves are indemonstrable.» — y el reparto entre los dos: el intelecto se ocupa de los primeros principios de lo inteligible y existente, y el conocimiento de lo demostrable, porque los principios son indemostrables

«is compounded of both knowledge and intellect, for wisdom is concerned both with the first principles and with what is already demonstrated from the first principles, those things that are the concern of knowledge. So far, then, as it is concerned with first principles, [wisdom] partakes of intellect; so far as it is concerned with what can thereafter be demonstrated, it partakes of knowledge.®» — el pasaje mismo en traducción: la sabiduría se compone de conocimiento e intelecto, participa del intelecto en cuanto atiende a los principios y del conocimiento en cuanto atiende a lo demostrado desde ellos

«This is exactly the kind of wisdom that Origen wants to present, the Wisdom that is Christ himself, whose primary title is the Wisdom of God, for Wisdom is ‘the beginning [ἀρχή] of [God's] ways for his works’ (Prov. 8:22; Princ. 1.2.1-3).» — y el giro con que Behr lo aplica: esa es la sabiduría que Orígenes quiere presentar, la que es Cristo mismo, cuyo título primero es Sabiduría de Dios, principio de los caminos de Dios para sus obras

«And, as Origen makes clear in the opening and concluding lines of the Preface, the Christian knowledge he intends to expound as a coherent structure is the teaching of Christ, the Word of God who spoke in Moses and the prophets and also in the apostles.» — lo que, según Behr, el prefacio declara sobre el contenido de ese saber: la enseñanza de Cristo, el Verbo de Dios que habló en Moisés, en los profetas y en los apóstoles

«But it is only after having expounded, twice over, the first principles of this system of knowledge, and the primary elements that it contains, that Origen turns to the Scriptures themselves.» — el orden que Behr subraya: solo después de exponer dos veces los primeros principios se vuelve Orígenes a las Escrituras mismas

«He begins by noting how to this point his discussion has been based on the common conceptions [rats κοιναῖς ἐννοίαις] and the evidence [τῇ évapyeia] of things that are seen’ (those things that for Aristotle serve as the principles for knowledge, ἐπιστήμη) and has also used the testimonies from the Scriptures, but that it is now time to turn to the Scriptures themselves, to show that they are indeed divine by demonstrating how they speak of Christ (Princ. 4.1.1).» — y la frase con que Orígenes marca ese paso: hasta ahí se apoyó en las concepciones comunes y en la evidencia de lo que se ve, y en los testimonios de las Escrituras, y ahora toca mostrar que son divinas mostrando cómo hablan de Cristo

«The connection between understanding the divine character of the Scriptures and their speaking of Christ is particularly highlighted by Origen: it was not possible to show the divine inspiration of the ancient Scriptures before the sojourn of Christ; but the sojourn of Jesus led to the clear conviction that they were composed by heavenly grace.» — el nexo que Behr destaca: no era posible mostrar la inspiración de las Escrituras antiguas antes de la venida de Cristo, y esa venida llevó a la convicción de que fueron compuestas por gracia celeste

«"Ihe light contained in the Law of Moses, but hidden by a veil, shone forth at the sojourn of Jesus, when the veil was taken away and the good things, of which the letter had a shadow, came gradually to be known (Princ. 4.1.6).» — la imagen con que Orígenes lo dice, citada por Behr: la luz contenida en la Ley de Moisés y escondida por un velo resplandeció a la venida de Jesús, quitado el velo. El troceo imprime *Ihe* por The

«However surprising this might be to a modern reader, it was a commonly acknowledged point to early Christians. Irenaeus makes exactly the same point:» — y el contrapunto histórico que Behr pone: por sorprendente que sea para un lector moderno, era punto comúnmente admitido entre los primeros cristianos, y Ireneo dice lo mismo

«Christ was hidden in the Scriptures, which could not be understood until the time when the things that they had spoken of had come to fulfilment; the book had been ‘shut up’ and ‘sealed, until the consummation (cf. Dan. 12.4) and so is full of enigmas and ambiguities;» — el paralelo de Ireneo tal como Behr lo refiere: Cristo estaba escondido en las Escrituras, que no podían entenderse hasta que se cumpliera lo anunciado, con el libro cerrado y sellado hasta la consumación y por eso lleno de enigmas y ambigüedades

«basically means ‘source’ or beginning, was used in ancient philosophy to mean either ‘the root assumption of a theoretical system, a principle in a logical sense or the ultimate underlying cause for the existence of some actual thing, a principle in a causal or ontological sense?75» — los dos sentidos antiguos que Behr toma de Daley: principio como supuesto raíz de un sistema teórico, en sentido lógico, y principio como causa última de la existencia de algo, en sentido causal u ontológico

«The most important characteristic of such knowledge was that it was built upon premises or axioms that were proper to the knowledge itself. According to Aristotle, such ‘hypotheses’» — el rasgo decisivo de esa ciencia: se levanta sobre premisas o axiomas propios del saber mismo, que Aristóteles llama hipótesis. El troceo parte *characteristic* con guion a fin de renglón y el extractor la reúne

«are the starting points or first principles (ἀρχαῦ of demonstration.” They cannot be proved, otherwise they would be dependent upon something prior to them, and we would be led into an infinite regression.*» — y lo que de ahí se sigue: esos principios no pueden probarse, porque dependerían de algo anterior y se caería en regresión infinita

«They are simply grasped by the intellect (νοῦς), through the course of its lived experience» — cómo se alcanzan entonces esos principios según esa tradición: los capta el intelecto en el curso de su experiencia vivida. La frase remata en la plana siguiente

«in the world, and as such are grounded in sense-perception and held together by the memory?!» — y su remate: fundados en la percepción sensible y sostenidos por la memoria

«the proper explanation only find a myth, for the truth that it contains is only brought to light by the cross of Christ, and only reading it in this way do we find our way into the Wisdom of God and ourselves come to shine with his light as did Moses.» — el remate del paralelo con Ireneo, ya en la plana siguiente: quien lee sin la explicación debida solo encuentra un mito, porque la verdad que el libro contiene la saca a luz la cruz de Cristo. La cita se corta antes de la llamada a nota que el troceo deja pegada con dos asteriscos

«The same point, as J. Louis Martyn has made clear, is evident in the Gospel of John and the writings of Paul: ‘the fundamental arrow in the link joining scripture and gospel points from the gospel story to the scripture and not from scripture to the gospel story. In a word, with Jesus’ glorification, belief in scripture comes into being by acquiring an indelible link to belief in Jesus’ words and deeds."» — la voz moderna que Behr alinea con eso, la de J. Louis Martyn: la flecha que une Escritura y evangelio apunta del relato evangélico a la Escritura y no al revés

«For Christians to read Scripture as Scripture is to read it in an apocalyptic key. Even if we are not prepared to do so ourselves, it is still essential to recognize that when we read the writings of the early Christian Fathers, they, nevertheless, are reading Scripture in this way.» — la consecuencia que Behr firma para el lector de hoy: leer la Escritura como Escritura es leerla en clave apocalíptica, y aunque uno no esté dispuesto a hacerlo, hay que reconocer que así la leen los Padres

«Despite the fact that the meaning of Scripture often eludes us, that it does indeed contain a divine sense is not disproved by our lack of comprehension, just as God's providential ordering of the world and its affairs, which also often eludes us, is not refuted by our inability to comprehend it (Princ. 4.1.7).» — el argumento de Orígenes que Behr refiere: que el sentido divino se nos escape no lo niega, igual que el orden providencial del mundo no queda negado por no comprenderlo

«And so, Origen urges us, using the words of Paul, to '(leave] behind the teaching of the first principles of Christ, which are but the elementary principles of knowledge, [and] press on to perfection (ibid; Heb 6:1), so that we might receive the wisdom that Paul says he speaks to the perfect (1 Cor. 2:6).» — y la exhortación con que sigue, en palabras de Pablo: dejar atrás la enseñanza de los primeros principios de Cristo, que son los principios elementales del conocimiento, y avanzar a la perfección

«He concludes, putting together various passages from Paul: ‘this wisdom will be stamped upon us distinctly, according to the revelation of the mystery [κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίου] which was kept secret through times eternal, but now made manifest through the prophetic Scriptures and the appearance of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for all ages. Amen.» — el cierre de ese tramo, cosido de pasajes paulinos: la sabiduría sellada en nosotros según la revelación del misterio callado por tiempos eternos y manifestado ahora por las Escrituras proféticas y la aparición del Salvador. El corchete con griego es el que imprime la plana. La cita se corta antes de la llamada a nota que el troceo deja pegada con dos asteriscos

«What follows, in Princ. 4.2-3, are indications about how to read and understand Scripture, based upon ‘the rule of the heavenly Church of Jesus Christ [handed down] through succession from the apostles:*?» — lo que viene después según Behr: indicaciones para leer y entender la Escritura, fundadas en la regla de la Iglesia celeste de Jesucristo transmitida por sucesión desde los apóstoles

«suggests that there are three levels of meaning in Scripture, corresponding to the body, soul, and spirit in a human being (Princ. 4.2.4-6), though, as this is rarely carried out by Origen himself in his commentaries and homilies, it is far from being intended as a methodological procedure; it is rather the simple observation that the meaning of any given passage is not always self-evident.”» — los tres niveles de sentido —cuerpo, alma y espíritu— con el límite que Behr les pone: Orígenes apenas los practica en sus comentarios, de modo que no son un procedimiento metodológico sino la observación de que el sentido no siempre es evidente

«More important are the three aims that the Spirit had in inspiring the Scriptures: first, to instruct human beings about themselves and their situation (Princ.» — lo que a Behr le parece más importante: los tres fines que el Espíritu tuvo al inspirar las Escrituras, el primero instruir al hombre sobre sí mismo y su situación

«second, to conceal these points, from those not prepared to undertake the toil of discovering matters of such importance, within the narratives of Scripture and yet make this ‘body’ of Scripture beneficial to the multitude through an abundance of moral examples (Princ. 4.2.8);» — el segundo fin: esconder esos puntos de quienes no están dispuestos al trabajo de descubrirlos, dentro de los relatos, y hacer aun así provechoso ese cuerpo de la Escritura para la multitud por sus ejemplos morales

«and third, to weave into the narrative enough ‘stumbling blocks’ and ‘obstacles and impossibilities so that we become aware that there is a deeper meaning to be found rather than remaining merely at the level of the letter (Princ. 4.2.8).» — y el tercero: tejer en el relato tropiezos, obstáculos e imposibilidades para que se advierta que hay un sentido más hondo que la letra

«The principal aim in all of this was to make known the connection (eipuds) amongst the spiritual events and the sequence (ἀκολουθία) of intellectual realities, harmonizing things that happened, according to the narrative, to the more mystical meanings, but sometimes interweaving things that did not happen.”» — el fin principal de todo ello, con la palabra griega que la plana imprime: dar a conocer la conexión entre los sucesos espirituales y la secuencia de las realidades intelectuales, armonizando lo ocurrido con los sentidos más místicos y entretejiendo a veces cosas que no ocurrieron

«Origen gives us his assurance that just because he asserts that some passages do not have a ‘bodily meaning this does not at all mean that he holds that none of it happened or that most precepts are not meant to be fulfilled literally.» — y el límite con que la acota, que Behr subraya: no sostiene que nada haya ocurrido ni que los preceptos no deban cumplirse a la letra

«But, as we have been directed by Christ himself to 'search the Scriptures, he knows that he must also give a positive account of how to read Scripture, at least in outline: the manner of understanding of which seems to us to be such as follows (end of 4.3.5, Greek).» — lo que se obliga a hacer en consecuencia: dar cuenta positiva, al menos en esbozo, de cómo debe leerse la Escritura

«On the surface level, Scripture does indeed give an account of how God chooses a certain nation, Israel, also called Jacob, which was divided into twelve tribes during the times of Jeroboam, with the ten tribes subject to him being named Israel, and the remaining two, the tribe of Levi and the one ruled over by the seed of David, being called Judah, the metropolis of which is Jerusalem (Princ. 4.3.6).» — el ejemplo con que lo desarrolla en el nivel de la superficie: la elección de Israel, su división en doce tribus y el reparto entre Israel y Judá con Jerusalén por metrópoli

«‘Israel according to the flesh’ (1 Cor. 10:18), and says that ‘not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel’ (Rom. 9:6), Origen takes him to mean that there is also an ‘Israel according to the Spirit; made up of Jews who are so, not openly, with circumcision in the flesh, for ‘he is a Jew who is one in secret, and circumcision is of the heart, in spirit not in letter’ (Rom. 2:28-9).» — y el giro paulino que Orígenes le aplica: hay también un Israel según el Espíritu, hecho de judíos que lo son en secreto, con circuncisión del corazón

«So, Origen concludes, while Scripture provides a narrative (the bulk of which is indeed true according to the letter) of the bodily Israelites descending from Adam, if truth be told, Adam is Christ, from whom all the spiritual Israelites descend, and Eve likewise is the Church, ‘the Jerusalem which is above} ‘our mother; ‘the city of the living God; to which we are called, ‘to the festal gathering and the church of the first-born who are enrolled in heaven.”» — la lectura que de ahí saca: si se dice la verdad, Adán es Cristo, de quien descienden los israelitas espirituales, y Eva es la Iglesia, la Jerusalén de arriba, nuestra madre, la ciudad del Dios vivo

«Likewise, also, for Egypt and the Egyptians, Tyre and the Tyrians, for no one, Origen points out, takes what is said in Ezekiel about Pharaoh or the ruler of Tyre as referring to a human being, nor in Isaiah about Nebuchadnezzar.”» — el argumento con que lo generaliza: nadie toma lo que Ezequiel dice del Faraón o del príncipe de Tiro como dicho de un hombre, ni lo que Isaías dice de Nabucodonosor

«In what follows, Origen uses this differentiation to seek out ‘the dark and invisible and hidden treasures' (Isa. 45:3), hidden in the Scriptures, alluding back to many of the topics that he has covered in the first three books.”*» — para qué usa esa diferencia, según Behr: buscar los tesoros oscuros, invisibles y escondidos en las Escrituras, volviendo sobre los temas de los tres primeros libros

«Having opened up a world of unseen mysteries, Origen concludes by returning to the other item mentioned in the Preface, the existence of things bodiless, afÏrming, as he has done at several points throughout the work, that though bodiless in themselves, they never exist without a body, for the Trinity alone is, strictly speaking, bodiless.”» — y con qué cierra: la existencia de lo incorpóreo, con la afirmación que repite a lo largo de la obra de que lo incorpóreo en sí nunca existe sin cuerpo, porque en rigor solo la Trinidad es incorpórea

«This discussion about bodiless reality at the end of his treatment of Scripture also resurfaces in the final part of Book 4, the ‘Recapitulation’ (Princ. 4.4). In fact, it dominates the whole last half of this concluding chapter (Princ. 4.4.5-10), forming an inclusio with the concluding paragraphs of the Preface.» — la estructura que Behr señala en la recapitulación: la discusión sobre lo incorpóreo domina su última mitad y forma inclusión con el final del prefacio

«After summarizing many of the points he has made during the course of the work, Origen turns to the question of matter, devoting several pages to showing just how difÏcult a philosophical concept it is.» — y a qué dedica esa recapitulación: a la cuestión de la materia, mostrando cuán difícil es como concepto filosófico

«He claims to have found no instance in Scripture where the word ‘matter’ is used to refer to a substance underlying bodies; when Isaiah says, ‘And he shall devour matter [ὕλη] like hay’ (Isa. 10:17), the word refers to ‘sins:» — la búsqueda negativa que Orígenes declara y que Behr consigna como tal: no halla en la Escritura lugar donde la palabra materia designe una sustancia subyacente a los cuerpos, y donde Isaías la usa se refiere a los pecados. El corchete con griego es el de la plana

«For Origen, matter is certainly not itself a first principle, as some philosophers postulated (Princ. 4.4.6).» — la negativa que Behr subraya frente a los filósofos: la materia no es en sí misma un primer principio

«But it is possible, Origen suggests, by way of a verse from First Enoch, ‘My eyes have seen your imperfection; to differentiate between matter and its properties or qualities, so that 'the mind of the prophet, examining and discussing every single visible thing, walked until it arrived at the first principle in which it beheld imperfect matter without qualities; for it is written in the same book, with Enoch himself speaking, "I beheld the whole of matter”, which Origen takes to mean the divisions of matter into everything in this world.”» — y la distinción que sí admite, apoyada en un versículo del Libro de Enoc: cabe separar la materia de sus propiedades o cualidades, y la mente del profeta llegó a contemplar la materia imperfecta sin cualidades

«God alone, Origen continues, is uncreated, and, being good by nature, he wants to benefit others, those, that is, who are able to receive him and be begotten as sons.» — el arranque del argumento final: solo Dios es increado y, siendo bueno por naturaleza, quiere beneficiar a los que pueden recibirlo y ser engendrados hijos

«Moreover, as God makes all things ‘by number and measure’ (Wis. 11:20), he alone being without end or measure, all created things are distinguished by number, in the case of intellectual beings, and by measure, in the case of matter.» — y la medida que de ahí se sigue: como Dios hace todo por número y medida, los seres intelectuales se distinguen por número y la materia por medida

«Intellectual beings necessarily use bodies, for God alone is bodiless, but, as we can differentiate, in thought alone, between matter itself and its properties, the properties of the body can change, by the will of the Creator, as the case demands.» — la consecuencia sobre los cuerpos: los seres intelectuales usan cuerpos necesariamente porque solo Dios es incorpóreo, y las propiedades del cuerpo pueden cambiar por voluntad del Creador

«And just as our physical eyes are able to partake of light, and are thus of one nature, so also every intellect that partakes of the intellectual light of the divine nature is also of one nature and substance with each other.» — la analogía del ojo y la luz: todo intelecto que participa de la luz intelectual de la naturaleza divina es de una misma naturaleza y sustancia con los demás

«And sharing in the light of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, it is necessary that we should become incorruptible and eternal, ‘so that the eternity of divine goodness may be understood in this respect as well, that those who obtain its benefits are also eternal’ (Princ. 4.4.9).» — y lo que se sigue de participar de la luz del Padre, el Hijo y el Espíritu: volverse incorruptible y eterno, para que se entienda también así la eternidad de la bondad divina

«Even if we fall away from this, we retain within ourselves ‘some seeds, as it were, of being restored and recalled to a better understanding, when the inner human being, who is also called the “rational” human being, is renewed according to the image and likeness of God who created him.» — la reserva que Orígenes añade: aun cayendo de ahí quedan dentro unas como semillas de ser restaurado, cuando el hombre interior, llamado también racional, se renueva según la imagen y semejanza de Dios

«We are therefore called to advance from bodily things, perceptible to the senses, to bodiless and intellectual realities, which are not perceptible to the senses, yet nevertheless seen through that which Solomon, the teacher of wisdom, calls ‘a divine sense (Princ. 4.4.10; Prov. 2:5).» — y el movimiento al que eso llama: pasar de lo corpóreo y sensible a lo incorpóreo e intelectual, que se ve por lo que Salomón llama un sentido divino

«It is with this sense that we will perceive rational beings, and with this sense Origen asks that what he has said and written be understood.» — y lo que Orígenes pide con ese sentido: que se perciban los seres racionales, y que con él se entienda lo que él ha dicho y escrito

«Finally Origen concludes his work by referring to the distinction between first principles and the demonstrations that they enable: ‘And concerning those points about which we have spoken, or others which follow on from them, we must think in accordance with the pattern we have laid out above:» — el cierre de la obra, que vuelve a la distinción entre primeros principios y demostraciones: lo dicho y lo que de ello se sigue debe pensarse conforme al patrón trazado

«In the acquisition of divine virtues and a divine sense we do not shed our bodies or become bodiless, as Origen was repeatedly charged with having taught.» — la enmienda que Behr opone al cargo repetido contra Orígenes: en la adquisición de las virtudes divinas no se dejan los cuerpos ni se vuelve uno incorpóreo

«Rather, the properties and qualities of our bodies, which are distinct from matter itself, are transformed, as those of iron are when placed in fire, to use the analogy that Origen applies to Christ himself, which we will consider more fully later; iron placed in fire becomes wholly fire, so that no other property is perceived in it.» — y la analogía con que describe lo que sí ocurre, la misma que Orígenes aplica a Cristo: el hierro puesto en el fuego se vuelve todo fuego y no se percibe en él otra propiedad

«Our bodies now are certainly corruptible; when we die, they will disintegrate and be dissolved back into the earth. But, as Origen expounds at length in Princ. 3.6, the last chapter of his second cycle of teaching, when what is sown in corruption and weakness, as an animated body, rises in the consummation, it will do so in power and glory, as a spiritual body» — el paso de la corrupción a la gloria tal como Behr lo resume desde el último capítulo del segundo ciclo: lo sembrado en corrupción y debilidad, como cuerpo animado, resucita en poder y gloria, como cuerpo espiritual

«In this, God ‘has the service of matter in every way, so that he can transform and apply it in whatever forms and species he desires’ (Princ. 3.6.7). It is of this transformed, spiritual body that Paul further says, we have a house not made by hands, eternal in the heavens (2 Cor. 5:1; Princ.» — y lo que eso supone de la materia: Dios tiene en todo su servicio, para transformarla y aplicarla en las formas que quiera, y de ese cuerpo transformado dice Pablo que es casa no hecha por manos

«Moreover, in this eschatological consummation, ‘God will be all in al? and so we too will become one as the Father and Son ‘are one?» — el término de esa consumación: Dios será todo en todos y también nosotros seremos uno como el Padre y el Hijo son uno. El troceo corrompe el cierre en *al?*

«As created beings, then, differentiated by number and always embodied in matter, we are nevertheless called to become one, eternal, and, purged of our vices and passions by the consuming fire that God is, to become the temple of God himself.» — el resumen que Behr hace de esa doctrina: seres creados, distinguidos por número y siempre encarnados en materia, llamados a hacerse uno y eternos y, purgados por el fuego consumidor que Dios es, a ser templo de Dios

«In other words, we are called to embody the bodiless God, not in matter as we presently experience it, but in matter transformed by the power of God:‘God ... makes and transforms all things' (Amos 5:8; Princ. 3.6.7).» — y la fórmula con que lo condensa: se nos llama a encarnar al Dios incorpóreo, no en la materia tal como ahora se experimenta sino en la materia transformada por el poder de Dios

«so that he makes us capable of receiving his Word and Wisdom, as Christ himself had promised, saying ‘I and the Father shall come and make our abode in him’: ‘he makes them, after all their vices and passions have been consumed, into a temple pure and worthy of himself’» — y para qué: para hacer al hombre capaz de recibir su Verbo y su Sabiduría, templo puro y digno de sí, una vez consumidos los vicios y las pasiones

«If, then, the human being is made ‘in the image and likeness’ of God, this is not seen in the form of the body, in or through matter subject to corruption, but through the acquisition of virtue, as the human being learns to be merciful» — dónde pone entonces la imagen y semejanza: no en la forma del cuerpo ni en la materia corruptible, sino en la adquisición de la virtud. La frase remata en la plana siguiente

«After giving various examples of such things—either things that could not have happened or prescriptions that are impossible to fulfil» — el tipo de ejemplos con que Orígenes lo sostiene: cosas que no pudieron ocurrir o prescripciones imposibles de cumplir. El tramo se corta en el límite de chunk

«Testament and in the New, Origen reiterates, our position is that with respect to the whole of the divine Scripture all of it has a spiritual meaning, but not all of it has a bodily meaning’ (Princ. 4.3.5).» — y la posición que reitera al otro lado del corte: toda la Escritura divina tiene sentido espiritual, pero no toda tiene sentido corporal

«'consuming fire; as Origen had explained in the opening paragraphs of Princ. 1.1, it is not because he consumes bodily matter, but rather our evil thoughts, wicked actions, and desire for sin,» — el remate de esa frase en la plana siguiente: el fuego no consume materia corporal sino los malos pensamientos, las acciones perversas y el deseo de pecar

«It is with this discussion of the principle of bodily nature, or of the spiritual body' that Origen brings his second cycle to a close.» — con qué cierra Orígenes el segundo ciclo, según Behr: con la discusión del principio de la naturaleza corporal, o del cuerpo espiritual

«Rather, as Daley argued, it is ‘its real goal: the introduction to a deeper way of reading Scripture that will be possible for him and plausible to his readers only after they have mastered the doctrinal structure he has been presenting in books one through three.» — y la que hace suya, de Daley: el libro cuarto es la meta real de la obra, la introducción a un modo más hondo de leer la Escritura que solo resulta plausible tras dominar la estructura doctrinal de los tres primeros

«If this, then, is the structure and the purpose of On First Principles, we are better able to understand the context in which it was written. As mentioned earlier, it was almost certainly written in 229/30.» — el paso al contexto de composición, con la fecha que Behr da por casi cierta

«According to Nautin, by this time Origen had already completed his Hexapla, a Commentary on Psalms 1-25, his Stromata, a work On the Resurrection, and his Commentary on Lamentations.» — la cronología que toma de Nautin: para entonces Orígenes tenía hechas la Hexapla, un comentario a los salmos, los Stromata, una obra sobre la resurrección y el comentario a las Lamentaciones

«It was after completing the first few books of his Commentary on Genesis that Origen wrote On First Principles. As Nautin suggests, the most likely reason why Origen switched from completing his Commentary on Genesis to writing On First Principles was criticism directed against his exegesis of the opening verses of Genesis.'» — y el motivo que Nautin le supone para interrumpir el comentario al Génesis y escribir esta obra: las críticas contra su exégesis de los primeros versículos

«The work was intended to demonstrate the grounding of his hermeneutic in a coherently presented account of the scientific knowledge of the ecclesial faith, which in turn would lead his readers into the deeper mysteries of theology and cosmogony.» — la intención que Behr le atribuye: mostrar que su hermenéutica se funda en una exposición coherente del saber científico de la fe eclesial, para llevar al lector a los misterios de la teología y la cosmogonía

«But far from reassuring his critics, ‘no small warfare broke out in the city;» — y el resultado que consigna: lejos de tranquilizar a sus críticos, estalló en la ciudad la guerra de que habla Eusebio. El tramo cruza el corte de plana

«Now that we have examined, in detail, the structure and purpose of On First Principles, we are in a position to reconsider some of the more difÏcult theological problems it presents, especially those that gave rise to the charges raised against Origen for having taught that there was an eternal realm of intellects, all of whom, apart from the one united to the Word, fell away into a diversity of ranks and bodies, but that after innumerable cycles of rising and falling, all will be restored to unity in God.» — Behr abre el capítulo de teología con el cargo que quiere examinar: que Orígenes enseñó un reino eterno de intelectos, caídos todos salvo el unido al Verbo en una diversidad de rangos y cuerpos, y restaurados al fin en la unidad de Dios tras ciclos innumerables

«As it happens, two of the key passages upon which these assertions are based lie within the two chapters on Christ, which thereby provide us with further material for exploring, respectively, his treatment of theology and then the economy.» — y dónde dice que están los dos pasajes clave de ese cargo: dentro de los dos capítulos sobre Cristo, uno en cada ciclo

«That Origen held creation to be in some sense eternal is based primarily on his argument in Princ. 1.2.10.» — el lugar único en que se apoya, según Behr, la tesis de una creación eterna en Orígenes

«This chapter deals with the titles of Christ expressing his divinity, especially and primarily Wisdom, who says of herself that God ‘created me as the beginning of his ways (Prov. 8:22).» — y de qué trata en realidad ese capítulo: los títulos de Cristo que expresan su divinidad, ante todo la Sabiduría que dice de sí haber sido creada como principio de los caminos de Dios

«Origen's teaching on creation is notoriously complex and has been the subject of controversy almost from the beginning.» — la advertencia que Behr antepone: la doctrina de la creación en Orígenes es notoriamente compleja y fue objeto de controversia casi desde el principio

«Earlier on in Princ. 1.2, Origen had explained this verse in terms that recall both the Platonic ‘ideas’ and the Stoic ‘reasons,» — el marco de lectura con que Behr sitúa el pasaje anterior: términos que recuerdan a la vez las ideas platónicas y las razones estoicas

«At that stage in his argument, then, if creation can be said to be eternal, it is only in a prefigurative sense.» — y el límite que Behr le pone en ese punto del argumento: si cabe llamar eterna a la creación, es solo en sentido prefigurativo

«However, when Origen turns, in Princ. 1.2.10, to consider the verse in which Wisdom is said to be 'the emanation of the purest glory of the Almighty (Wis. 7:25), he seems to imply a more concrete content to the eternal existence of creation.» — el punto donde, según Behr, Orígenes parece dar contenido más concreto a esa existencia eterna: el versículo que llama a la Sabiduría emanación de la gloria purísima del Todopoderoso

«He begins by examining what might be meant by 'the glory of the Almighty’ to then be able to understand what its ‘emanation is, and does so by way of an analogy to the correlation, used earlier in the chapter, between the existence of a father and that of a son, to demonstrate that the Son is eternal (Princ. 1.2.2).» — el método de ese pasaje: examinar qué sea la gloria del Todopoderoso mediante la analogía, ya usada antes, entre la existencia de un padre y la de un hijo

«As it is impossible to be a father without a son, so also it is impossible for God to be almighty ‘if there are not those over whom he can exercise his power; and, as it is clearly better for God to be almighty than not, those things by virtue of which he is almighty must always have existed: ‘if there never is a ^when" when he was not almighty, by necessity those things must also subsist by which he is called the Almighty, and he must always have had those over whom be exercised power and which were governed by him as king or prince» — la analogía en su forma cruda: como no hay padre sin hijo, tampoco hay Todopoderoso sin aquellos sobre quienes ejerce su poder, de modo que esas cosas siempre han de haber existido

«and of these things, he adds, he will speak more fully in the proper place, when discussing the subject of his creatures (Princ. 1.2.10).» — y el aplazamiento que el propio Orígenes añade: de esas cosas hablará en su lugar, al tratar de las criaturas

«Pared down to the bare bones of the logical structure of the analogy, as was done by Methodius of Olympus,'? and those who follow in his wake, this opening passage does indeed seem to suggest that creation must in some sense be eternally actualized for God to be eternally the Almighty.» — cómo queda el argumento reducido a su esqueleto lógico, como hizo Metodio de Olimpo y los que le siguen: la creación tendría que estar eternamente actualizada para que Dios sea eternamente Todopoderoso

«Stated in such a manner, as Williams suggests, it rests upon the premise that true statements about God must hold eternally, and the mistaken inference from this that anything standing in relation to God must also exist eternally.’» — y el diagnóstico que Behr toma de Williams: ese modo de plantearlo descansa en la premisa de que lo verdadero sobre Dios vale eternamente, y en la inferencia equivocada de que también existe eternamente todo lo que está en relación con él

«However, as we have seen when considering the structure of the work, and as Origen himself reminds us in the last lines of the opening paragraph of this section, he is not here concerned with created beings themselves, but with the various titles of Christ and how they correlate amongst themselves and with the Father.» — la objeción de Behr a esa reducción: en ese lugar Orígenes no trata de los seres creados sino de los títulos de Cristo y de su correlación entre sí y con el Padre

«In other words, Origen’s concern is not so much the status of creation itself, but to work out the hierarchy of the scriptural titles for God and Christ.» — cómo Behr resume el propósito del pasaje: no el estatuto de la creación sino la jerarquía de los títulos escriturarios de Dios y de Cristo

«In doing this, Origen establishes a fundamental theological point: the creative activity of God must be understood in terms of his existence already as Father.’» — y el punto teológico que le adjudica: la actividad creadora de Dios se entiende desde su existencia previa como Padre

«This is, in fact, the opening afÏrmation of almost every subsequent creed: I believe in One God Father Almighty. God’s creative act is thus grounded in the eternal relationship between Father and Son.» — la consecuencia histórica que Behr le añade: es la afirmación con que abre casi todo credo posterior, y ancla el acto creador en la relación eterna de Padre e Hijo

«Origen continues his examination of the verse in question by pointing out that, as an ‘emanation, Wisdom also shares in ‘the glory of the Almighty, as is shown by the fact that Christ, the coming one, is also called ‘the Almighty’ in Scripture (Rev. 1:8). Moreover, since Scripture calls Christ ‘God’ (John 20:28), we should not hesitate to also call the Son of God ‘Almighty.» — el paso siguiente del argumento: como emanación, la Sabiduría comparte la gloria del Todopoderoso, y como la Escritura llama a Cristo Todopoderoso y Dios, no hay reparo en llamar así al Hijo

«That is, not only does Scripture confer the title ‘Almighty upon both God and Christ, but the truth of their omnipotence is demonstrated by Paul’s words in Philippians, that, as a result of the Passion, every knee bows at the name of Jesus.» — la lectura de Behr: la omnipotencia no solo se atribuye por título, se muestra por las palabras de Pablo en Filipenses, y eso como resultado de la Pasión

«The dominion which the Father holds over all things, and by virtue of which he is called ‘the Almighty; is exercised through his Son, who is thus also called ‘Almighty, for ‘at the name of Jesus every knee bows.» — y cómo queda entonces el dominio: el Padre lo ejerce por el Hijo, que por eso se llama también Todopoderoso

«Christ's glory is ‘pure or genuine, unlike that of every being that is created, for, as created and thus alterable, they can only possess righteousness or wisdom as an accidental property, and so they can also always fall away,» — la razón de esa diferencia según Behr: todo ser creado y alterable posee la justicia o la sabiduría como propiedad accidental, y por eso puede caer siempre

«For Origen, then, in Princ. 1.2.10, not only does the attribute of omnipotence which calls creation into being derive from the relationship between the Father and the Son, but the glory of omnipotence’ is found nowhere else but on the cross, as the reference to the Philippians hymn makes clear.» — la tesis que Behr fija sobre ese capítulo: la omnipotencia que llama a la creación deriva de la relación entre Padre e Hijo, y la gloria de esa omnipotencia no está en otro sitio que en la cruz

«If we do not strip away from his argument the scriptural verses that he is in fact discussing, to treat it merely as a logical argument, but instead pay attention to the scriptural verses he uses to develop his argument, we see a very different picture emerge.» — y el método con que lo defiende: no despojar el argumento de los versículos que discute para tratarlo como mera lógica

«but for now it is sufÏcient to note that Origen consistently connects Christ's lordship with his exaltation on the cross: ‘the Son became king through suffering the cross.» — el nexo que Behr da por constante en Orígenes: la señoría de Cristo ligada a su exaltación en la cruz, que se hizo rey por padecerla

«In other words, the ‘omnipotence Origen is speaking about when using the analogy with the relationship between Father and Son is the power revealed through the weakness of the cross.» — la fórmula con que lo condensa: la omnipotencia de esa analogía es el poder revelado en la debilidad de la cruz

«And likewise the ‘creation’ that is brought into being by this omnipotence of God is not simply that of lifeless, inanimate, and irrational matter, over which a workman might» — y la otra mitad de la enmienda: la creación que esa omnipotencia trae al ser no es la de una materia inerte, inanimada e irracional. La frase remata en la plana siguiente

«exercise his power, but the creation brought into existence through his Word, ‘by word and reason, not by force and necessity, that is, through persuasion upon rational, self-determining beings, who through God’s long economy of creative activity come, in the end, to bow their knees in subjection to Christ, through whose own subjection to the Father God comes to be ‘all in all?» — su remate: la creación que viene por el Verbo, por palabra y razón y no por fuerza ni necesidad, es decir por persuasión sobre seres racionales y autodeterminados

«To understand what is going on here, it is important to note that the word ‘creation, even in modern English, can be used in various ways. It can refer, for instance, to God' initial act of creation, creating the world ex nihilo, or it can refer to what which is thus brought into being, the creation, in which we now live and breathe.» — la distinción de sentidos con que Behr despeja el equívoco: creación como acto inicial de crear el mundo de la nada, y creación como lo que así viene al ser

«However, there is another sense in which the word can be used. Williams, in discussing how Origen spoke about the Son with reference to Proverbs 8:22, suggestively comments that for Origen ‘creation, ktisis, is strictly only the unimpeded expression of God's rational will:'"» — y el tercer sentido, tomado de Williams, que es el que necesita: creación como la expresión sin trabas de la voluntad racional de Dios

«In this sense, following Proverbs 8:22, where Wisdom says of herself ‘the Lord created me; Origen can perhaps even speak of Wisdom, the Son of God, as being a creature; though by this Origen clearly means something other than what was later understood as ‘creation:'”» — lo que ese sentido permite decir: que Orígenes llegue a hablar de la Sabiduría, el Hijo de Dios, como criatura, entendiendo por ello algo distinto de lo que después se entendió por creación

«The ‘creation’ of God, everything brought into subjection to him such that he is ‘all in all; is the reality brought into existence at the end, not the beginning, it is eschatological, not protological.» — la tesis que Behr firma y que gobierna toda su lectura: la creación de Dios, todo lo sujetado a él de modo que sea todo en todos, es la realidad que viene al ser al final y no al principio

«And it is only by looking to the end that Origen, as we will see further below, tries to get some idea of the beginning.» — y el corolario de método: solo mirando al fin intenta Orígenes hacerse alguna idea del principio

«Later tradition, with roots already in Isaiah (esp. 65:17-24), would of course speak of this as a ‘new creation, or creation renewed, but that this eschatological reality can simply be called ‘the creation' is also evidenced by the New Testament.» — cómo Behr la conecta con la tradición posterior: esta se referirá a ello como nueva creación, pero el Nuevo Testamento ya llama a esa realidad escatológica simplemente la creación

«It is seen most clearly in the opening self-identification that the risen Christ speaks to the church of Laodicea: "Ihe words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness [ὁ μάρτυς], the beginning of God's creation [ἡ ἀρχὴ» — el lugar donde lo ve más claro: la autopresentación del Cristo resucitado a la iglesia de Laodicea, el Amén, el testigo fiel y verdadero, el principio de la creación de Dios. Los corchetes con griego son los de la plana

«The Christ of the Apocalypse, the apocalyptic Christ, is the ‘beginning’ of God's creation. That ‘the beginning of God's creation’ is an ‘Amer is significant: God's ‘creation’ requires a response, an ‘Amen:» — y lo que Behr lee en ese título: el Cristo apocalíptico es el principio de la creación de Dios, y que ese principio sea un Amén significa que la creación de Dios pide respuesta

«Harl maintained, a separate treatise on hermeneutics, which, while not an afterthought, as it is already mentioned in the Preface, is a change of direction nevertheless, moving from ‘physics’ to a theory of spiritual knowledge.» — y la segunda, la de Harl: tampoco un tratado aparte de hermenéutica que cambia de rumbo de la física a una teoría del conocimiento espiritual

«The work as a whole is remarkably well organized and structured, from the laying out of the structure in the Preface, through the two treatments, theological and economic, of the apostolic preaching and the ecclesiastical preaching, organizing a coherent body of theological know» — el juicio de conjunto con que cierra la sección, primer tramo: la obra está notablemente bien organizada, del plan del prefacio a los dos tratamientos teológico y económico de las dos predicaciones

«ledge, whose first principles, or axioms, regarding the first principles of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and rational beings, have been established and their implications demonstrated, which then serve as a hermeneutical grounding for the studious reader to return to the Scriptures, with a divine sensibility, to be nourished by them so as to become as merciful and perfect as is God, and to realize their rightful place in the heavenly worship and as the temple of God.» — y su remate: fijados esos primeros principios y desplegadas sus implicaciones, sirven de suelo hermenéutico para volver a las Escrituras con sensibilidad divina y ocupar el lugar propio en el culto celeste

«within this very subsistence of Wisdom was every capacity and form of the creation that would come to be—both of those things which exist primarily and of those which occur in consequence, having been formed beforehand and arranged by the power of foreknowledge regarding these very created things, which had been as it were outlined and prefigured in Wisdom herself —Wisdom herself says through Solomon that she was created the beginning of the ways of God, that is, containing within herself the beginning and the reasons and the species of the entire creation.’» — el pasaje mismo: en la subsistencia de la Sabiduría estaba toda capacidad y forma de la creación futura, delineada y prefigurada de antemano por el poder de la presciencia, de modo que ella contiene el principio, las razones y las especies de toda la creación. El pasaje vuelve en el cuerpo del volumen

«In this Wisdom, therefore, who ever was with the Father, was creation always delineated and shaped, and there never was a moment when the prefiguration of those things, which were to be thereafter, was not in Wisdom:» — en nota, el segundo pasaje que Behr aduce para lo mismo: en la Sabiduría, que siempre estuvo con el Padre, la creación estaba siempre delineada y formada, y nunca hubo un momento en que la prefiguración de lo que sería no estuviera en ella. También vuelve en el cuerpo

«But even now, although briefly, I think it necessary to give a warning, since the question before us concerning Wisdom is how Wisdom is the ἀπόρροια (or the emanation) of the purest glory of the Almighty, lest anyone should consider that the title of Almighty is anterior in God to the birth of Wisdom, through whom he is called Father, since it is said that [Wisdom] is the emanation of the purest glory of the Almighty.» — la advertencia que Orígenes mismo intercala, citada por Behr: que nadie tenga el título de Todopoderoso por anterior en Dios al nacimiento de la Sabiduría, por la que se le llama Padre. El pasaje vuelve en el cuerpo

«Let him who would think like this hear what the Scriptures clearly proclaim, saying, In Wisdom have you made all things, and the Gospel teaches, that All things were made by him and without him nothing was made, and» — y los versículos con que la apoya: en la Sabiduría hiciste todas las cosas, y todo fue hecho por él y sin él nada se hizo. También vuelve en el cuerpo

«let him understand from this that the title of Almighty cannot be older in God than that of Father, for it is through the Son that the Father is almighty.'^» — el remate de esa advertencia al otro lado del corte de plana: el título de Todopoderoso no puede ser en Dios más antiguo que el de Padre, porque es por el Hijo que el Padre es todopoderoso. Vuelve en el cuerpo

«in this way will that saying be true, which he himself says to the Father, All mine are yours and yours mine, and I am glorified in them. Now, if all things which are the Father's are also Christ's, and, among all that the Father is, he is also Almighty, then without doubt the only-begotten Son ought to be Almighty, so that the Son might have all that the Father has. And I am glorified, he says, in them. For, at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus is Lord in the glory of God the Father,» — el pasaje con que lo sostiene: si todo lo del Padre es de Cristo, y entre eso está el ser Todopoderoso, el Hijo unigénito ha de serlo, y ante el nombre de Jesús se dobla toda rodilla. Vuelve en el cuerpo

«So, in this way is God’s Wisdom herself the pure and clear emanation of the glory of God, in respect of his being Almighty, glorified as the emanation of omnipotence or of glory?» — y la conclusión de ese mismo tramo: así es la Sabiduría de Dios emanación pura y clara de la gloria de Dios en cuanto Todopoderoso. Vuelve en el cuerpo

«is by Word and Reason, not by force and necessity, that they have been subjected. And therefore his glory is in the very fact that he possesses all things, and this is the purest and most clear glory of omnipotence, that by Reason and Wisdom, not by force and necessity, all things have been subjected.» — y la clave misma: la sujeción se obra por Palabra y Razón, no por fuerza y necesidad, y en eso está la gloria purísima de la omnipotencia

«Now the purest and most clear glory of Wisdom is a convenient designation to distinguish it from that glory which is not called pure or genuine."» — el contraste que abre en la misma frase: la gloria purísima de la Sabiduría se distingue de una gloria que no se llama pura ni genuina. Vuelve en el cuerpo

«since the Wisdom of God, who is his only-begotten Son, is in all respects unalterable and unchangeable, and every good quality is in her essentially, such that it can never be changed or altered, therefore her glory is declared to be pure and genuine.» — y la conclusión de Orígenes: siendo la Sabiduría inalterable e inmutable en todo, y teniendo toda cualidad buena por esencia, su gloria se declara pura y genuina. Vuelve en el cuerpo

«And we add this, so that it may be more clearly understood what the glory of» — el arranque del pasaje donde Orígenes explica en qué consiste la gloria de la omnipotencia; el troceo corta aquí en el límite de chunk y la frase sigue en la línea siguiente

«omnipotence is. The God and Father is Almighty because he has power over all things, that is, over heaven and earth, sun and moon, and all things in them. And he exercises power over them through his Word, for at the name of Jesus every knee bows, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth.» — y su continuación: el Padre es Todopoderoso porque tiene poder sobre todas las cosas, cielo y tierra, sol y luna, y lo ejerce por su Verbo, porque ante el nombre de Jesús se dobla toda rodilla

«something that comes about through death. As the verse from the Psalm puts it: ‘You take away their breath, they die and return to the dust, you send forth your Spirit and they will be created [κτισθήσονται] (Ps. 103:29-30). The movement of the work of God is always, in Scripture, from death to life: 'T kill and I make alive’ (Deut. 32:39).» — cómo cierra Behr el argumento sobre el testigo: el movimiento de la obra de Dios va siempre, en la Escritura, de la muerte a la vida. El troceo imprime *'T* por el pronombre de primera persona

«The ‘Amen which completes the creative work of God, making it his creation, is that given by the martyr?» — y quién pronuncia ese amén: el mártir, que es lo que completa la obra creadora de Dios y la hace su creación

«In an important passage in his Commentary on John, Origen differentiates between creating and fashioning or moulding:» — la distinción que Behr trae del Comentario a Juan para deshacer el equívoco de la palabra creación

«Here Origen, ever keen to discern the proper ordering of scriptural terminology, is working out, as Harl suggested, a hierarchy of terms describing the different aspects of ‘creation’: a descending gradation of ‘create’ (κτίζειν), ‘make’ (ποιεῖν), and ‘mould’ (πλάσσειν).}}5» — la jerarquía de términos que Behr, siguiendo a Harl, lee ahí: una gradación descendente de crear, hacer y modelar

«He does this by noting the different verbs used in the two creation accounts in the opening chapters of Genesis, by way of a verse from Job: our προηγουμένη being’ is not simply a ‘superior’ existence, as created in the image of God, an intellectual reality superior to bodily matter, but also, more immediately, our primary or primordial existence: Gen 1:26 comes, literally, before Gen 2:7, when God takes dust from the earth and ‘moulds the human being.» — y de dónde la saca: de los verbos distintos de los dos relatos de la creación del Génesis, leídos por un versículo de Job, con lo primordial antes de que Dios tome el polvo y modele al hombre

«That which comes from the earth is neither simply ‘created nor made; though, because resulting ‘from a cause; it has ‘been made to be mocked by the angels. Though this might seem like a superior intellectual being mocking a lower earthly one, it cannot but help recall the ‘mocking’ of Christ, on his way to becoming ‘the beginning of God’s» — lo que Behr lee en la burla de los ángeles: lo que viene de la tierra no es simplemente creado ni hecho, y esa burla no puede dejar de recordar la burla de Cristo camino de ser el principio de la creación de Dios

«This is perhaps also connected to the fact that whereas everything else in Gen. 1 is simply spoken into existence by a divine ‘fiat; ‘Let there be; the only thing said to be God's own work, that for which he takes counsel and is, as such, his own project, to make human beings in his image, is given in the subjunctive, ‘Let us make’ (Gen. 1:26-7).» — en nota, el detalle gramatical que Behr enlaza con eso: todo lo demás en el primer capítulo del Génesis se dice con un hágase, y solo del hombre a imagen se dice hagamos, en subjuntivo

«As we have seen, for Origen, the ‘image’ character of the human being is not seen in the body itself, but rather in the acquisition of virtue by a human being, their ‘Amen.» — y lo que de ahí saca: para Orígenes el carácter de imagen no está en el cuerpo sino en la adquisición de virtud, que es el amén del hombre

«Moreover, as Adam was the father of all human beings descended from him, for those who discern the spiritual meaning of Scripture, as we have seen when discussing Princ. 4, Adam is Christ; from whom are descended all those who have the Church as their heavenly mother (Princ. 4.3.7).» — el giro escriturario que Behr recuerda: para quien discierne el sentido espiritual, Adán es Cristo, y de él descienden los que tienen a la Iglesia por madre celeste

«So when Origen asks, in the opening of his Homilies on Genesis, what is ‘the beginning’ (ἀρχή) in which God made heaven and earth? He answers, who else can it be ‘except our Lord and Saviour of all, Jesus Christ, the first-born of every creature’?''®» — la respuesta que Orígenes da al preguntar qué es el principio en que Dios hizo el cielo y la tierra: nadie sino Jesucristo, primogénito de toda criatura

«Scripture is not speaking here of any temporal beginning [Non ergo hic temporale aliquod principium dicit], but it says that the heaven and the earth and all things which were made were made in the beginning, that is, in the Saviour:» — en nota, la frase de la homilía que cierra el punto, con el latín de Rufino entre corchetes: no se habla ahí de un principio temporal, sino de que todo fue hecho en el principio, esto es, en el Salvador

«Although the first account of Genesis comes first, literally, scripturally, and therefore theologically, yet for us, in our own experience of existence, the second account is first: we come into this world in Adam, until we too learn to give our ‘amen to God in Christ.'?» — y la inversión de orden que Behr formula: el primer relato es primero literal y teológicamente, pero en nuestra experiencia es primero el segundo, porque venimos al mundo en Adán hasta que aprendemos a dar nuestro amén en Cristo

«A further important term for Origen's understanding of creation is καταβολή, usually translated in the Scriptural translations as ‘foundation, but which, as Origen makes clear in a very dense passage, signifies rather a casting downwards.» — el término que Behr desentierra para la doctrina de la creación: el que se traduce por fundación significa más bien un arrojar hacia abajo

«He beings by appealing to various scriptural verses in which the term ‘foundation’ appears (though some of this may well be Rufinus additions, together with explanatory comments for his Roman readers).» — la cautela con que Behr trata ese tramo: parte de él podría ser añadido de Rufino, con comentarios explicativos para lectores romanos. El troceo imprime *beings* por begins

«Especial important is Ephesians 1:4, which speaks of how God has chosen us before the foundation of the world.» — el versículo del que arranca el argumento: el que dice que Dios nos eligió antes de la fundación del mundo. El troceo imprime *Especial* por Especially

«Because the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but by the one who subjected it in hope [Rom. 8:20], so that both the sun and the moon and the stars and the angels of God might fulfil an obedient service for the world; and for those souls which, because of their excessive spiritual defects needed these denser and more solid bodies, and because of those for whom this was necessary, this visible world was founded.» — el tercero, con el versículo paulino y su consecuencia: para que el sol, la luna, las estrellas y los ángeles cumplan un servicio obediente, y para las almas que por sus defectos necesitaban cuerpos más densos y sólidos, fue fundado este mundo visible

«From this, therefore, a descent of everyone alike would seem to be indicated by the meaning of the word, that is, of καταβολή. The whole creation indeed entertains the hope of freedom, of being set free from the bondage of corruption when the children of God [Rom. 8:21], who either fell away or were scattered abroad, shall be gathered together into one, or when they shall have fulfilled their other duties in this world, which are known to God alone, the Artificer of all things.!'» — y el cuarto: la palabra misma indica un descenso de todos por igual, y la creación entera espera la libertad de la servidumbre de la corrupción cuando los hijos de Dios sean reunidos

«There are several things in this dense passage that must be noted clearly. First, itis by a contemplation of the end that Origen speculates about the beginning.» — el primero de los cinco puntos que Behr extrae del pasaje: la especulación sobre el principio parte de la contemplación del fin

«As we have seen, when discussing the 'Recapitulation he holds that those who come to share in the immorality and incorruptibility of God also share in his eternity—they ‘are also eternal’ (Princ. 4.4.9).» — el apoyo que le da: quienes llegan a compartir la inmortalidad e incorruptibilidad de Dios comparten también su eternidad

«If our end is to enter into the eternity of God, being purged by him as a consuming fire, and so coming to share in his properties (as does the iron in the fire), then we too, while still embodied, material, creatures, will be in a world ‘not seen’ and ‘eternal; with ‘a house not made by hands, eternal in the heavens’ (2 Cor. 4:18-5:1; Princ. 2.3.6; 3.6.4). This being so, then our beginning in this world and its time can only be thought of as a falling away from that eternal and heavenly reality.» — y la consecuencia que Behr saca para el principio: si el fin es entrar, todavía corpóreos, en un mundo no visto y eterno, el principio en este mundo y su tiempo solo puede pensarse como caída desde esa realidad

«The second point to note is that Origen does not speak about the falling away of all rational beings from their end as being caused by sinful movements, satiety, or boredom. While some, certainly, have fallen away because of their own movements, in all their variety, others have descended to minister to those who have fallen.» — el segundo punto, que enmienda el cargo corriente: Orígenes no atribuye la caída de todos los seres racionales a movimientos pecaminosos, hartazgo o tedio, porque unos descendieron a servir a los caídos

«‘it is possible that the dragon is not the beginning of the work of the Lord in general, but is the beginning of the many made with a body to be mocked by his angels, since some can exist with a body in another manner.» — y la del Comentario a Juan: cabe que el dragón no sea el principio de la obra del Señor en general, sino el principio de los muchos hechos con un cuerpo para ser burlados

«And likewise, he continues, Paul, not willing, but of hope’ wishes to remain in the flesh, for he preferred ‘to depart and be with Christ; yet he remained in the state he is in for the benefit of others?» — el ejemplo paulino del mismo orden: Pablo prefería partir y estar con Cristo, y permaneció en su estado en provecho de otros

«Third, Origen does not describe this falling away in terms of taking a body or becoming embodied, but rather as resulting in those who fall away having ‘denser and more solid bodies:» — el tercer punto de Behr, que es el que más pesa contra el cargo: la caída no se describe como tomar cuerpo ni encarnarse, sino como quedar con cuerpos más densos y sólidos

«In his chapter treating, economically, the soul, Origen suggests, through the supposed etymology of the word ‘soul’ (taking ψυχή to come from ψυχόω, which, as a passive verb, can mean ‘to become cold’), that the intellect becomes a soul through cooling down.» — la etimología con que Orígenes lo explica, tal como Behr la refiere: el alma vendría de enfriarse, y el intelecto se vuelve alma al enfriarse

«As he notes, as God is ‘a consuming fire; whenever Scripture speaks of the manifestation of God in creation, it is in fiery terms (the burning bush, for instance), whereas whenever it speaks of the work of the adverse powers, and these powers themselves, it is always as ‘cold’ (Princ. 2.8.3).» — y el patrón escriturario que aduce: Dios se manifiesta siempre en términos de fuego, como la zarza, y las potencias adversas siempre como frío

«Christ, he continues, has come ‘to cast fire upon the earth; and so sets Simon and Cleopas' hearts aflame on the road to Emmaus.”» — el contrapunto: Cristo vino a echar fuego sobre la tierra y enciende los corazones de los de Emaús

«If our end is to be in the consuming fire that is God, transformed by incorporeal fire, and coming to share in the properties of that fire, while the matter of our bodies remains what it is, our cooling down by descending from that fire results in our bodies becoming ‘denser.» — y la simetría con que Behr cierra el punto: si el fin es estar en el fuego consumidor que Dios es y compartir sus propiedades, el enfriarse al descender de ese fuego deja los cuerpos más densos

«The fourth point is that it is this descent, of all, in various ways and for various purposes, that is indicated by the scriptural expression ‘the foundation of the world.» — el cuarto punto: eso, el descenso de todos de maneras y por fines distintos, es lo que indica la expresión fundación del mundo

«But, fifth, and perhaps most important, is that, by starting with the end to speculate about the beginning, our ‘election, which happens ‘before the foundation of the world, is, in a very real sense, the call that brings us into being, prior to being ‘fashioned’ in the foundation of the world; and prior also to our being created; which only properly happens at the end.» — y el quinto, que Behr tiene por el más importante: la elección antes de la fundación del mundo es la llamada que nos trae al ser, antes de ser modelados y antes de ser creados, lo cual solo ocurre propiamente al final

«Finally, as we have ‘descended’ or rather, in fact, been ‘thrown down from our high calling into this world, which results from a ‘cause’ that required our being ‘fashioned’ from the dust of this earth, then our coming into being in the time of this world, and our being ‘fashioned’ to become, in the end, created; means that our subjection to decay, not by our own will, ‘but by the one who subjected it in hope, are the 'birth-pangs of creation (an apocalyptic theme if there ever was one), as it labours in travail until the revelation, the apokalypsis, of the sons of God (Rom 8:19-22).» — el remate de la sección: sujetos a la corrupción no por voluntad propia sino por quien nos sujetó en esperanza, lo nuestro son los dolores de parto de la creación, que gime hasta la revelación de los hijos de Dios

«Our ‘election, then, is in a real sense in God, prior to our being fashioned from the dust of the earth and the foundation of the world: we are primarily and primordially called to participate in the heavenly liturgy, and to enter into that eschatological and apocalyptic reality is to be created. But, because of certain causes, our being created (only realized in the end) is by way of our being fashioned or moulded from the dust of the earth, the earth which has itself been ‘thrown down; to be mocked by the angels.» — el resumen con que Behr abre la plana siguiente: la elección está en Dios antes del modelado y de la fundación, y entrar en esa realidad escatológica es ser creado, aunque por ciertas causas ese ser creado pase por el modelado del polvo

«What was the cause of this falling away? In a word, as we will see in the next section, it was the scandal of 'the lamb slain from the foundation of the world’ (Rev. 13:8).» — la causa que Behr anuncia para la caída, y que es la clave de su lectura entera: el escándalo del cordero degollado desde la fundación del mundo

«While happening in the time of the world at a particular moment, it is an eternal reality in God, and so is always spoken of in the past tense.» — y el estatuto que le da: ocurre en el tiempo del mundo en un momento concreto y es a la vez realidad eterna en Dios, por lo que se habla de ella en pasado

«As difÏcult as this might be for us to understand, with our modern preoccupation with history and chronology, it is the presupposition of Christians from the time that the risen Christ opened the books to show how Moses and all the prophets spoke of how it was necessary for the Son of Man to suffer to enter into his glory (cf. Luke 24:24-6).» — el obstáculo que Behr identifica en el lector de hoy y la respuesta: con nuestra preocupación moderna por la historia y la cronología cuesta, pero es el presupuesto cristiano desde que el resucitado abrió los libros en Emaús

«As Irenaeus had put it a few decades before Origen, when Isaiah says, ‘I have seen with my eyes the King, the Lord of hosts', and the other prophets similarly in their words, visions, and mode of life, they 'see the Son of God as a human being, conversing with human beings, while prophesying what was to happen, saying that he who was not come as yet was present, proclaiming also the impassible as subject to suffering, and declaring that he who was then in heaven had descended [descendisse] into the dust of death' (Haer. 4.20.8).» — el testimonio de Ireneo que aduce: los profetas ven al Hijo de Dios como hombre, proclamando presente al que aún no había venido, impasible al sujeto al sufrimiento, y descendido al polvo de la muerte al que estaba en el cielo

«Or, almost a millennium later, as Anselm put it: “When God does anything, once it is done it is impossible for it not to have been done, but it is always true that it has been done’ (Cur 17).» — y el de Anselmo, casi un milenio después: hecho algo por Dios, es imposible que no haya sido hecho, y siempre es verdad que lo fue

«So far we have considered, in Princ. 1.2, the ‘theology’ regarding Christ, examining the titles found in Scripture expressive of his divine nature, and we have followed the reflections contained therein about creation, omnipotence, and the glory of omnipotence, which, by way of Philippians 2 and the exaltation of Christ in his subjection, results in all creation bowing their knee in adoration of the one upon whom the most exalted name is bestowed.» — el balance con que Behr abre el capítulo sobre la economía: lo visto hasta ahí fue la teología sobre Cristo, con la creación, la omnipotencia y la gloria de la omnipotencia que por Filipenses acaba en toda la creación doblando la rodilla

«Origen opens the chapter with these words: ‘It is time, now that these points have been discussed, for us to return to the Incarnation of our Lord and Saviour, how he became human and dwelt among human beings’ (Princ. 2.6.1).» — la frase con que se abre el capítulo económico sobre Cristo, citada por Behr

«Note that he does not say that we will now turn to the topic of the Incarnation, but rather will resume discussing it. That is, his presentation of the divine titles of Christ in Princ. 1.2, expressive of his divine nature, was not a treatment of the 'pre-incarnate Word, who subsequently, at a certain point in the economy, becomes ‘incarnate’» — lo que Behr lee en esa palabra: no anuncia pasar al tema de la Encarnación sino reanudarlo, de modo que los títulos divinos del primer ciclo no eran un tratamiento del Verbo preencarnado

«As Rowan Williams strikingly puts it, and as we will have cause to consider more deeply later, the existence of Jesus is not an episode in the biography of the Word?» — y la fórmula de Rowan Williams con que lo cierra: la existencia de Jesús no es un episodio en la biografía del Verbo

«Having considered Christ's divine names, Origen now turns to how the same Christ is spoken of as the Mediator’ (Princ. 2.6.1; 1 Tim. 2:5). He begins by praising highly the lofty pre-eminence of Christ, as being above all things.» — el paso siguiente del capítulo: Cristo como Mediador, y el elogio de su preeminencia por encima de todo

«Yet this is only done to heighten even more the fact that this one has been revealed in the lowliest terms possible:» — y para qué sirve ese elogio según Behr: para realzar que ese mismo ha sido revelado en los términos más bajos posibles

«But of all the marvellous and magnificent things about him, this altogether surpasses the astonishment of the human intellect, and the frailty of mortal intelligence does not discover in what way it can think or understand how that mighty Power of divine majesty, that very Word of the Father and that very Wisdom of God, in whom were created all things visible and invisible [Col. 1:16], can be believed to have been within the compass of that man who appeared in Judea; and indeed that the Wisdom of God entered into the womb of a woman, to be born an infant and to utter cries like the wailing of infants;» — el pasaje mismo, primer tramo: lo que supera el asombro del intelecto humano es que el Poder de la majestad divina, el Verbo y la Sabiduría en quien fue creado todo, quepa en aquel hombre aparecido en Judea y entre en el vientre de una mujer para nacer niño y llorar

«then, afterwards, that he was also reported to be troubled in death, as even he himself acknowledges, saying, My soul is sorrowful even unto death [Matt. 26:38]; and that, at the end, he was brought to that death which is accounted by human beings the most shameful, although he rose again on the third day.» — el segundo tramo: turbado ante la muerte, como él mismo reconoce, y llevado a la muerte que los hombres tienen por más vergonzosa, aunque resucitó al tercer día

«When, then, we see in him some things so human that they appear to differ in no respect from the common frailty of mortals, and some things so divine, that they are appropriate to nothing else but that primal and ineffable nature of divinity, the narrowness of human understanding is bewildered and, struck with amazement at so great a wonder, it knows not which way to turn, what to hold to, or whither to take itself.» — el tercero: viendo en él cosas tan humanas que no difieren de la fragilidad común y otras tan divinas que solo convienen a la naturaleza inefable, la estrechez del entendimiento humano queda perpleja

«If it thinks of God, it sees a mortal being; if it thinks of a human being, it perceives him returning from the dead with spoils after conquering the kingdom of death.» — y el remate: si piensa en Dios, ve un mortal; si piensa en un hombre, lo percibe volviendo de entre los muertos con los despojos tras vencer el reino de la muerte

«Because, therefore, the first human being fell away from the superior things and desired a life different from the better life, he deserved to be a beginning [ἀρχὴν] neither of something created nor made [οὔτε κτίσματος οὔτε ποιήματος, but of something moulded [πλάσματος] by the Lord, made [πεποιημένον] to be mocked by the angels. Now, our superior being [ἡ προηγουμένη ὑπόστασις] is in our being made [κτίσαντος] according to the image of the Creator, but that resulting from a cause [ἡ ἐξ αἰτίας] is in the thing moulded [ἐν τῷ ... πλάσματι], which was received from the dust of the earth.''4» — el pasaje mismo, con sus corchetes griegos tal como los imprime la plana: el primer hombre no mereció ser principio de algo creado ni hecho, sino de algo modelado por el Señor; el ser superior está en haber sido hecho según la imagen del Creador, y el que resulta de una causa, en lo modelado del polvo de la tierra

«that rational creatures have also had a similar beginning. And if they had a beginning such as the end for which they hope, they were undoubtedly from the beginning in those [worlds] that are not seen and eternal, And if this is so, then there has been a descent from the higher conditions to the lower, not only on the part of those souls who have by the variety of their own movements deserved it, but also on that of those who, to serve the whole world, were brought down from the higher and invisible conditions to these lower and visible ones, even against their will.» — su remate y el segundo movimiento: si el principio fue como el fin esperado, hubo un descenso de lo alto a lo bajo, no solo de las almas que lo merecieron por sus movimientos sino también de las que fueron bajadas para servir al mundo entero, aun contra su voluntad

«‘Not everyone who is a captive, Origen begins his first homily on» — la frase de las homilías sobre Ezequiel con que Behr lo apoya; el troceo la parte en el cambio de plana y la remata diciendo que no todo cautivo padece cautiverio por sus pecados

«Only in this way, he continues, is the truth of both natures ... shown to be in one and the same being: But he fears that the explanation of that mystery may perhaps even be beyond the reach of the whole creation of heavenly powers, so he will speak in the fewest words possible’» — la cautela que Orígenes antepone al pasaje siguiente, según Behr: la verdad de ambas naturalezas se muestra en un mismo ser, pero teme que la explicación del misterio exceda a toda la creación de las potencias celestes

«We then have one of the most intriguing and extraordinarily dense and rich passages in the whole of On First Principles, which must be quoted in full:» — el valor que Behr da al pasaje que viene: uno de los más densos y ricos de toda la obra

«The only-begotten Son of God, therefore, through whom, as the previous course of discussion has shown, all things were made, visible and invisible [Col. 1:16], according to the mind of Scripture both made all things and loves what he made [cf. Wis, 11:24]. For as he is himself the invisible image of the invisible God [Col. 1:15], he invisibly bestowed upon all rational creatures a participation in himself, in such a way that each one received from him a degree of participation to the extent of the loving affection by which they adhered to him.» — el pasaje, primer movimiento: el Hijo unigénito, imagen invisible del Dios invisible, otorgó invisiblemente a todas las criaturas racionales participación de sí, y cada una la recibió en la medida del afecto amoroso con que se adhirió a él

«With this substance of the soul mediating between God and the flesh (for it was not possible for the nature of God to be mingled with a body without a mediator) there is born, as we said, the God-man, the medium being that substance for which it was certainly not contrary to nature to assume a body. Yet neither, on the other hand, was it contrary to nature for that soul, as a rational substance, to receive God, into whom, as we said above, as into the Word and the Wisdom and the Truth, it had already wholly passed.» — tercer movimiento, que es el núcleo cristológico: mediando esa sustancia del alma entre Dios y la carne, porque la naturaleza de Dios no podía mezclarse con un cuerpo sin mediador, nace el Dios-hombre

«And therefore, either because it was wholly in the Son of God or because it received the Son of God wholly into itself, deservedly it is called, along with the flesh which it had assumed, the Son of God and the Power of God, the Christ and the Wisdom of God; and, on the other hand, the Son of God, through whom all things were created, is named Jesus Christ and the Son of Man.’» — cuarto movimiento, que es la comunicación de idiomas: por estar toda en el Hijo de Dios o por haberlo recibido todo en sí, esa alma con la carne asumida se llama Hijo de Dios, Poder de Dios, Cristo y Sabiduría de Dios, y el Hijo de Dios se llama Jesucristo e Hijo del Hombre

«And, moreover, the Son of God is said to have died, that is, in virtue of that nature which could accept death; and he, who is proclaimed as coming in the glory of God the Father with the holy angels, is called the Son of Man. And for this reason, throughout the whole of Scripture, the divine nature is spoken of in human terms as much as human nature is adorned with marks indicative of the divine.» — quinto movimiento: se dice que el Hijo de Dios murió, por la naturaleza capaz de aceptar la muerte, y se llama Hijo del Hombre al que viene en la gloria del Padre, y por eso en toda la Escritura lo divino se dice en términos humanos y lo humano se adorna con marcas de lo divino

«For of this, more than anything else, can that which is written be said, that They shall both be in one flesh, and they are no longer two, but one flesh [Matt. 19:5~6; Gen. 2:24]. For the Word of God is thought to be more in one flesh with the soul than a man with his wife.» — y la imagen con que lo sella: serán los dos una sola carne, y el Verbo de Dios está más en una carne con el alma que un hombre con su mujer

«The title ‘Son of Man’ here is not simply a statement about Christs humanity, but an apocalyptic term (cf. Dan. 7:13), as is made clear in its use in the next sentence.» — en nota, la advertencia de Behr sobre ese título: no es simplemente una afirmación sobre la humanidad de Cristo, sino un término apocalíptico

«This passage does indeed seem to suggest classic ‘Origenist’ teaching: there was a pre-existing realm of intellects, all united to the Word, but, because of their varying love for him, they subsequently fell away in various degrees.» — lo que el pasaje parece decir a primera vista, y que Behr concede antes de objetarlo: un reino preexistente de intelectos unidos al Verbo que cayeron en grados distintos por su amor desigual

«However, the Scriptural verse given—No man takes my soul from me ... (I lay it down of myself)— indicates that Origen is thinking of a different, and scriptural rather than mythological, scene altogether.» — y la objeción, apoyada en el versículo mismo que Orígenes cita: el escenario que tiene en mente es escriturario y no mitológico

«The most concrete passage in Scripture, where all who had, with varying degrees of love, adhered to their Creator, fell away, except one, is the crucifixion (atleast in theSynoptic Gospels, we will return to John later), though, of course, seen apocalyptically in the light of the cross, the whole of Scripture is read as speaking about the continuing falling away from God, from the beginning.» — cuál es ese escenario según Behr: la crucifixión, donde todos los que se habían adherido con amor desigual cayeron menos uno, y desde la que se lee apocalípticamente toda la Escritura

«When Jesus lays down his soul of his own accord, Origen says—adhering, inseparably and indissolubly, from ‘the beginning of creation, to the Word and Wisdom of God, the Truth and the Light—he receives him wholly and passes into his light, to be made ‘one spirit’ with him, as the apostle promises to those who imitate him, so that, with the soul mediating between the Word and the flesh (by laying down the soul), the theanthropos, the God-man, is born, so that the soul, along with the flesh, is called the Son of God, and the Son of God is called not simply Jesus, but Jesus Christ and the Son of Man.» — y la relectura entera del pasaje con esa clave: al entregar su alma por propia voluntad, y mediando el alma entre el Verbo y la carne, nace el Dios-hombre

«Reading this passage this way, which is, admittedly, novel (as was our reading of Princ. 1.2.10 above), flies in the face of the standard interpretation of Origen, which itself goes back to the polemics raised against him. It also flies in the face of what we think we know about the ‘Logos Christology’ and 'incarnational theology of the early Church that we expect to find in Origen. Instead it might seem to present Origen as some kind of adoptionist.» — la objeción que Behr se pone a sí mismo, declarando la novedad de su lectura: va contra la interpretación habitual, contra la cristología del Logos que se espera hallar ahí, y podría hacer parecer adopcionista a Orígenes

«Now I think God also highly exalted this man when he became obedient unto death, and the death of a cross. For the Word in the beginning with God, God the Word, was not capable of being highly exalted. But the high exaltation of the Son of Man which occurred when he glorified God in his own death consisted in the fact that he was no longer different from the Word but was the same with him» — el pasaje griego que aduce: el Verbo en el principio no era capaz de ser exaltado, y la exaltación del Hijo del Hombre, al glorificar a Dios en su propia muerte, consistió en que ya no fue distinto del Verbo sino el mismo que él

«The unity of the God-man is again effected upon the Cross, for after it, and in its light, we can no longer differentiate between human and divine properties: we no longer know Christ by a set of fleshly properties, but we now only know him as the Word of God.» — la tesis que Behr fija: la unidad del Dios-hombre se efectúa en la cruz, y después de ella ya no se distinguen propiedades humanas y divinas ni se conoce a Cristo por propiedades carnales

«The abasement of the Cross is not a concealment of his divinity, but rather its fullest revelation: We must dare say that the goodness of Christ appeared greater and more divine and truly in accordance with the image of the Father when he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a Cross’ (Comm. Jo. 1.231).» — y la inversión que la sostiene, con la frase de Orígenes: el abatimiento de la cruz no oculta su divinidad sino que es su revelación plena, porque la bondad de Cristo apareció mayor y más divina al humillarse hasta la muerte de cruz

«Ignatius of Antioch, for instance, speaks of ‘the one physician ... Jesus Christ as first passible and then impassible (Eph. 7.2).» — el primer testimonio antiguo que alinea: Ignacio de Antioquía habla del único médico, primero pasible y luego impasible

«He also speaks of his impending martyrdom in similar terms to Origens description of the birth of the God-man: ‘Birth-pangs are upon me. Suffer me, my brethren; hinder me not from living, do not wish me to die. ... Suffer me to receive the pure light; when I shall have arrived there, 1 shall become a human being. Suffer me to follow the example of the Passion of my God’ (Rom. 6).» — y el segundo, del mismo Ignacio, en términos de parto: me hostigan los dolores de parto, dejadme recibir la luz pura, y cuando haya llegado allí seré hombre

«As we have seen, Gregory opens his Contra Eunomium by saying that the most universal division is between the seen and the unseen, and that the distinction between uncreated and created falls within the latter realm. In Contra Eunomium 3.3, Gregory provides an account of Peter’s statement in Acts, that ‘God made [ézoincev] him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified (Acts 2:36), in terms of the distinction between uncreated and created."*» — el tercer testimonio, el de Gregorio de Nisa, y el versículo de Hechos sobre el que trabaja: que Dios hizo Señor y Cristo a ese Jesús a quien vosotros crucificasteis

«Whereas Eunomius would see the Son's suffering upon the Cross as a mark of distinction between him and the impassible Father, for Gregory it instead reveals ‘the supreme exercise of his power rather than ‘an indication of weakness, showing that ‘the God made manifest through the Cross ought to be honoured just as the Father is honoured’ (Eun. 3.3.30-4).» — el desacuerdo que Behr consigna sin arbitrar: Eunomio ve en el padecer de la cruz una marca de distinción respecto del Padre impasible, y Gregorio el ejercicio supremo de su poder

«Moreover, he continues, ‘we say that the body also, in which he accepted the Passion, being combined with the divine nature, was by that commingling made into that which the assuming nature is.» — y lo que Gregorio añade sobre el cuerpo: combinado con la naturaleza divina, quedó hecho por esa mezcla lo que es la naturaleza que asume

«With regard to Peter's words, Gregory points out that it is not as though there are two subjects here; rather, Scripture says that two things have been done to a single person, the Passion by the Jews, the honour by God, not as though there was one who suffered and another who was honoured by the exaltation (Eun. 3.3.42).» — el argumento de Gregorio sobre el sujeto único: no hay dos sujetos, sino dos cosas hechas a una sola persona, la Pasión por los judíos y el honor por Dios

«He who says exalted by the Right Hand of God clearly reveals the unspeakable economy of the mystery, that the Right Hand of God, who made all things that are, who is the Lord by whom all things were made and without whom nothing that is subsists, himself raised to his own height the human being [τὸν ... ἄνθρωπον] united to him, making him also, by the commixture, to be what he is by nature: he is Lord and King, and the King is called Christ; these things he made him too. ...» — el pasaje fuerte de Gregorio, primer tramo: la Diestra de Dios levantó a su propia altura al hombre unido a él, haciéndolo por la mezcla lo que él es por naturaleza

«And this we are plainly taught by the voice of Peter in his mystic discourse, that the lowliness of the one crucified in weakness (and weakness, as we have heard from the Lord, indicates the flesh [Mt 26:41]), that, by virtue of its mingling with the infinite and boundless [nature] of the Good, remained no longer in its own measures and properties, but by the Right Hand of God was raised up together, and became Lord instead of servant, Christ the King instead of a subject, highest instead of lowly, God instead of man.» — y su segundo tramo: la bajeza del crucificado en debilidad, por mezclarse con lo infinito del Bien, no quedó en sus propias medidas y propiedades, y se volvió Señor en vez de siervo, Cristo Rey en vez de súbdito, Dios en vez de hombre

«This might also sound like some kind of adoptionism, but it is not. Rather, to paraphrase Gregory’s argument here and throughout Against Eunomius 3.3: through the Passion, Christ, as human, becomes that which as God he always is.» — cómo Behr lo resuelve en una frase: por la Pasión, Cristo, en cuanto hombre, llega a ser lo que en cuanto Dios siempre es

«The cross is our lens and prism for understanding the revelation of God in Christ; it brings into focus ‘the God revealed through the Cross’ and allows us to see the whole of creation and the economy as refracted into its diverse aspects. We cannot begin with an understanding of God, or the Son of God in whom he is revealed, apart from the Cross.» — la fórmula que gobierna toda la lectura de Behr: la cruz es lente y prisma de la revelación de Dios en Cristo, y no cabe partir de una comprensión de Dios al margen de ella

«If we attempt to theologize apart from the Cross, to see God revealed in Christ apart from the Passion (after which we no longer know him in the flesh) we will end up defining divinity in human terms.» — y el riesgo que señala si se hace lo contrario: acabar definiendo la divinidad en términos humanos

«This is Gregory's chief complaint about Apollinarius: he ‘defines the divine by means of the perceptible appearance, rather than by intellectual contemplation, for ‘the true account; according to Gregory, is that Christ ‘is human and God, by what is seen human, by what is understood God?» — la queja de Gregorio contra Apolinar que aduce como ejemplo: define lo divino por la apariencia perceptible y no por la contemplación intelectual, cuando Cristo es hombre por lo que se ve y Dios por lo que se entiende

«Christ [is] always, both before the economy and after it; [the] human being, however, [is] neither before it nor after it, but only during the time of the economy. Neither [is] the human being before the Virgin, nor, after the ascent into heaven, [is] the flesh still in its own properties."» — el pasaje de Gregorio que Behr tiene por más sorprendente: Cristo lo es siempre, antes y después de la economía, y el hombre ni antes ni después, sino solo durante el tiempo de la economía

«What he seems to be pointing to is that although “Moses and all the prophets’ had always spoken about how the Son of Man enters his glory by suffering, and this is also the content of the apostolic preaching, yet during the time when Jesus walked the earth, seen in the flesh by fleshly eyes, the glory and divinity of the Son of Man was not in fact seen, not until the exaltation on the Cross.» — cómo lo entiende Behr: aunque Moisés y los profetas hablaron siempre de que el Hijo del Hombre entra en su gloria padeciendo, mientras Jesús anduvo en la tierra esa gloria no fue vista hasta la exaltación en la cruz

«For Origen, likewise, the identity of Christ, the Son of God, is shown through the Passion, hanging upon the Cross.» — y el mismo punto en Orígenes: la identidad de Cristo se muestra por la Pasión, colgado de la cruz

«But how can Celsus, and the enemies of the divine Word, and such as do not investigate Christianity with a love of truth, know the meaning of the different appearances of Jesus? I refer to the different periods of his life, to anything he did before the Passion and whatever happened after his Resurrection from the dead.!”» — la línea final de la Filocalia 15 que Behr cita en apoyo: cómo van a conocer los enemigos del Verbo el sentido de las distintas apariencias de Jesús, antes de la Pasión y después de la Resurrección

«The unchanging identity of Christ is fixed upon the Cross, which as lens and prism enables us to see everything as patterned upon it.» — la tesis en su forma más apretada: la identidad inmutable de Cristo queda fijada en la cruz, que como lente y prisma permite ver todo conforme a ella

«If we, for instance, attempt to look behind the Cross to see the human being Jesus before the Passion, as if the Passion had never happened (rather unhistorical in its attempt to be historical), we will end up seeing Jesus as he appears in his human properties, as the son of the carpenter from Nazareth; we will not'see; or rather intellectually contemplate the Word of God, and so will not be doing theology.» — y lo que ocurre si se mira detrás de la cruz, como si la Pasión no hubiera ocurrido: se ve al hijo del carpintero de Nazaret y no se contempla al Verbo, de modo que no se hace teología

«If, on the other hand, we look through the Cross, we see the unchanging identity of the crucified one throughout his life, from his birth from the Virgin and throughout his ministry.» — y lo que ocurre si se mira a través de ella: se ve la identidad inmutable del crucificado a lo largo de toda su vida, desde el nacimiento de la Virgen

«And this is, of course, the same hermeneutic needed to read Scripture and encounter the Word of God: the Word of God 'eternally takes flesh in the Scriptures (ἀεὶ yap ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο) so that he might tabernacle amongst us, but only if we recline on his breast, as did John, do we come to know the Word.» — el traslado de esa clave a la lectura de la Escritura: el Verbo se hace carne siempre en las Escrituras para habitar entre nosotros, pero solo se le conoce reclinándose en su pecho, como Juan. El griego entre paréntesis es el que imprime la plana

«We must ascend the mountain, to see him transfigured, speaking with Moses and Elijah, the Law and the Prophets, about his ‘exodus’ in Jerusalem.TM If we stay at the level of the flesh, the letters, we will never come to contemplate the Word.» — y la condición que pone: subir al monte para verlo transfigurado hablando con Moisés y Elías, la Ley y los Profetas, porque quedándose en el nivel de la carne y de las letras nunca se contempla al Verbo

«Returning to Princ. 2.6, Origen continues his economic account of Christ by examining further what is meant by the title ‘Christ, bestowed upon this one, and does so by bringing in the verse from the Psalms, ‘You loved righteousness and hated iniquity. Therefore God, your God, anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your fellows’ (Ps. 44:7-8, Princ. 2.6.4).» — el paso siguiente del capítulo económico: qué significa el título de Cristo, leído por el salmo de la unción con óleo de alegría

«It is, he comments, ‘by the merit of its love [that] it is anointed with the oil of gladness, that is, the soul with the Word of God is made Christ:» — y la respuesta que da: por el mérito de su amor es ungida con el óleo de alegría, es decir, el alma con el Verbo de Dios es hecha Cristo

«And as the Psalm verse also speaks of being anointed ‘beyond your fellows, the anointing in this case indicates that the grace of the Spirit was given to him not as it had been given to the prophets, “but that the essential fullness of the Word of God himself was in itj for, as the Apostle says, ‘in him the fullness of divinity dwelt bodily’ (Col. 2:9).» — la diferencia que la unción marca frente a los profetas: no la gracia del Espíritu como a ellos, sino la plenitud esencial del Verbo mismo

«It is for this reason that Isaiah can say that ‘he did no sin' (Isa. 53:9), and Hebrews, that ‘he was tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin’ (Heb. 4:15), and, even more, ‘before the child know how to call father or mother, he turned himself away from iniquity’ (Isa. 8:4 and 7:16).» — los tres testimonios escriturarios que Orígenes encadena para la impecabilidad: no hizo pecado, fue tentado en todo sin pecado, y antes de saber llamar padre o madre se apartó de la iniquidad

«But whereas, because of the faculty of free will, a variety and diversity had taken hold of individual souls, so that one was attached to its Creator by a more ardent, and another by a feebler and weaker, love, that soul, of which Jesus said, No one takes my soul from me [John 10:18], adhering, from the beginning of creation [Rev. 3:14] and ever after, inseparably and indissolubly, to him, as to the Wisdom and the Word of God, and the Truth and the true Light,» — segundo movimiento: por el libre albedrío entró variedad en las almas, unas unidas al Creador con amor más ardiente y otras más débil, y aquella alma de la que Jesús dijo que nadie le quita su alma se adhirió a él inseparablemente desde el principio de la creación

«and receiving him wholly and passing itself into his light and splendour, was made with him in a pre-eminent degree one spirit, just as the Apostle promises to those who ought to imitate him, that He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit [1 Cor. 6:17].» — y su remate: recibiéndolo entero y pasando a su luz y esplendor, fue hecha con él un solo espíritu, como el Apóstol promete a los que han de imitarlo

«But it is, nevertheless, what we are given to see in the Synoptic Gospel (again, we will return to John later), and especially in the Letter to the Hebrews and Revelation. It is also something that is found not only in earlier writers, but also in the later Orthodox tradition.» — y cómo la contesta: es lo que dan a ver los sinópticos, la carta a los Hebreos y el Apocalipsis, y se halla tanto en escritores anteriores como en la tradición ortodoxa posterior

«Having come to this conclusion, Origen then attempts to answer those who, accepting that Christ did not sin, ask how he» — la objeción que Orígenes se plantea a continuación; la frase cruza el corte de plana y pregunta cómo puede Cristo tener alma racional si es propio de esas almas ser capaces de bien y de mal

«But it is, nevertheless, how Origen speaks concretely and explicitly in his Commentary on John, which, as it survives in Greek, is undisputedly his own words.» — el apoyo con que defiende su lectura: así habla Orígenes de manera concreta y explícita en el Comentario a Juan, que se conserva en griego y es indisputablemente suyo

«this soul, which is Christ, so chose to love righteousness that, in accordance with the immensity of its love, it adhered to it unchangeably and inseparably, so that the firmness of purpose and immensity of affection and inextinguishable warmth of love destroyed all thought of alteration or change, such that what was dependent upon the will is now changed into nature by the exertion of long usage; and so it is to be believed that there is in Christ a human and rational soul, and yet not be supposed that it had any thought or possibility of sin.» — la respuesta de Orígenes a esa objeción, citada por Behr: el alma que es Cristo amó la justicia con tal inmensidad que lo dependiente de la voluntad quedó cambiado en naturaleza por el ejercicio de un uso largo

«It is here, in explaining how this might be so, that Origen brings in the analogy of iron placed in a fire'receiving the fire throughout all its pores and veins and becoming wholly fire? Could we say, Origen asks, that, while it remains in the fire and incessantly burning, the iron is ever capable of becoming cold?» — la analogía con que lo explica: el hierro puesto al fuego recibe el fuego por todos sus poros y venas y se vuelve todo fuego, y mientras siga ardiendo no puede enfriarse

«In this way, then, that soul which, like iron in the fire, was placed in the Word forever, in Wisdom forever, in God forever, is God in all that it does, feels, and understands; and therefore it can be called neither alterable or changeable, since, being ceaselessly kindled, it came to possess immutability from its union with the Word of God.» — y la aplicación: el alma puesta para siempre en el Verbo, en la Sabiduría y en Dios es Dios en todo lo que hace, siente y entiende, y recibió la inmutabilidad de esa unión

«To all the saints some warmth of the Word of God must indeed be supposed to have passed; but in this soul it must be believed that the divine fire itself essentially rested, from which some warmth may have passed to others.» — la diferencia de grado que fija: a todos los santos pasó algún calor del Verbo, pero en esa alma descansó esencialmente el fuego divino mismo

«Finally, the fact that it says, God, your God, anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows, shows that that soul is anointed in one way, with the oil of gladness, that is, with the Word of God and Wisdom, and his fellows, that is, the holy prophets and apostles, in another way. For they are said to have run in the fragrance of his ointment [Song 1:4], while that soul was the vessel containing the ointment itself, of whose glowing heat all the prophets and apostles are made worthy partakers. Therefore, as the fragrance of the ointment is one thing, and the substance of the ointment another, so also Christ is one thing and his fellows another.» — y la imagen del ungüento con que sella la distinción: esa alma fue el vaso que contenía el ungüento, y los profetas y apóstoles corrieron en la fragancia del ungüento

«And just as the vessel itself, which contains the substance of the ointment, can in no way accept any foul smell, yet it is possible that those who participate in its fragrance, if they move a little way from its glowing heat, may accept any foul smell that comes upon them, so also, in the same way, it was impossible that Christ, being as it were the very vessel in which was the substance of the oint» — la última vuelta de esa imagen: el vaso que contiene el ungüento no puede aceptar mal olor, pero quienes solo participan de su fragancia pueden aceptarlo si se apartan de su calor. El tramo se corta donde el troceo cambia de plana

«it is, to become identified by the properties of the fire (hot and fluid), so also, the human nature of Jesus (identified by certain sense-perceptible human properties), is no longer known by these properties, but rather by the properties of God, being beyond space and time, revealed, as we have seen, in and through the cross, known by intellectual contemplation. Through the Passion, Christ, as human, becomes that which, as God, he always is.» — cómo lee Behr esa analogía: la naturaleza humana de Jesús ya no se conoce por propiedades sensibles sino por las de Dios, reveladas en la cruz, y por la Pasión Cristo, en cuanto hombre, llega a ser lo que en cuanto Dios siempre es

«Extremely important in Princ. 2.6.4-6 is that by being anointed ‘beyond his fellows Christ enables his fellows to share in his unction, to be themselves anointed of God; it is a ministry exercised towards them.» — lo que Behr tiene por importantísimo en ese capítulo: la unción sobre sus compañeros les permite participar de ella, de modo que es un ministerio ejercido hacia ellos

«Their problem can be resolved in this way. We must say to them that at one time God, with the article, is very God, wherefore also the Saviour says in his prayer to the Father, That they may know you the only true God [John 17:3]. On the other hand, everything besides the very God, which is made God by participation in his divinity, would more properly not be said to be the God, but god [πᾶν δὲ τὸ παρὰ» — la distinción con que lo resuelve: Dios con artículo es el Dios mismo, y todo lo que se hace dios por participación de su divinidad se diría más propiamente dios, sin artículo. El corchete griego es el de la plana

«To be sure, his firstborn of every creature [Col. 1:15], inasmuch as he was the first to be with God and has drawn divinity into himself, is more honoured than any other gods besides him (of whom God is God as it is said, The God of gods, the Lord has spoken, and he has called the earth [Ps. 49:1). It was by his ministry that they became gods, for he drew from God that they might be deified, sharing ungrudgingly also with them according to his goodness.» — y el papel del primogénito en esa cadena: por su ministerio se hicieron dioses los demás, porque él sacó de Dios que fueran deificados y compartió con ellos sin envidia

«The God, therefore, is the true God. The others are gods formed according to him as images of the prototype. But again, the archetypal image of the many images is the Word with the God, who was in the beginning [John 1:1]. By being with the God he always continues to be God. But he would not have this if he were not with God, and he would not remain God if he did not continue in unceasing contemplation of the depth of the Father.» — el remate: los otros son dioses formados según él como imágenes del prototipo, y él permanece Dios por estar con Dios en contemplación incesante de la profundidad del Padre

«It is through his entry into God, by his unceasing contemplation of the depths of the Father, that the Lord is God and ministers this divinity to others,» — lo que Behr resume de ese pasaje: el Señor es Dios por su entrada en Dios, por su contemplación incesante de las profundidades del Padre, y ministra esa divinidad a otros, que así se hacen también dioses. La cita se corta aquí porque el troceo parte *who-thereby* con guion a fin de renglón y el extractor lo fundiría en una palabra que la plana no imprime

«The Saviour is eternally begotten by the Father, so also, if you possess the Spirit of adoption [Rom. 8:15] God eternally begets you in him according to each of your works, each of your thoughts. And being begotten you thereby become an eternally begotten son of God in Christ Jesus.'*» — el pasaje que Behr aduce para la generación eterna del creyente: si se posee el Espíritu de adopción, Dios te engendra eternamente en él según cada obra y cada pensamiento

«Becoming an eternally begotten son of God in Christ Jesus, we in fact put on the identity of Jesus.» — y lo que Behr concluye de ahí: llegar a ser hijo eternamente engendrado es revestirse de la identidad de Jesús

«We can now return to the Gospel of John, where, unlike the Synoptics, in which all the disciples fall away at the Passion, the beloved disciple, who had reclined on the breast of Jesus at the table, now remains at the foot of the Cross, along with the Virgin, to hear words only spoken in the Gospel of John:» — la diferencia entre los evangelios que Behr aprovecha: en los sinópticos todos los discípulos caen en la Pasión, y en Juan el discípulo amado permanece al pie de la cruz con la Virgen

«We might dare say, then, that the Gospels are the firstfruits of all Scriptures, but that the firstfruits of the Gospels is that according to John, whose meaning no one can understand who has not leaned on Jesus’ breast nor received Mary from Jesus to be his mother also.» — la frase de Orígenes sobre ese evangelio: es primicia de las primicias, y su sentido no lo entiende quien no se ha reclinado en el pecho de Jesús ni ha recibido de él a María por madre

«But he who would be another John must also become such as John, to be shown to be Jesus, so to speak. For if Mary had no son except Jesus, in accordance with those who hold a sound opinion of her, and Jesus says to his mother, Behold your son [John 19:26], and not, ‘Behold, this man also is your son, he has said equally, “Behold, this is Jesus whom you bore. For indeed everyone who has been perfected no longer lives, but Christ lives in him [Gal. 2:20], and since Christ lives in him, it is said of him to Mary, Behold your son, the Christ.» — y la consecuencia que saca: quien quiera ser otro Juan ha de hacerse tal como Juan, para ser mostrado como Jesús, porque el perfeccionado ya no vive él sino que Cristo vive en él

«Putting on the identity of Jesus, as an eternally begotten son of God, although we come into being in time, our end, through death and resurrection in Christ, is to be a participant in the eternal liturgy in the heavenly court.» — el arco entero que Behr traza: revestidos de la identidad de Jesús, aunque venimos al ser en el tiempo, nuestro fin es participar por muerte y resurrección en la liturgia eterna de la corte celeste

«Yet, as the eternity of God is strictly speaking outside of time, non-temporal, entering into that reality is not entering into an eternity conceived in a temporal fashion, to enter, as it were, at a given moment in that eternity, taken as an endless chronological duration, as a continuation of our present temporal life.» — y la precisión que exige: como la eternidad de Dios está fuera del tiempo, entrar en ella no es entrar en un momento dado de una duración cronológica sin fin

«And so, in a sense, we must always already be there, even though we have not yet, within the chronology of this world, arrived there. As such, our life on earth is, in a real sense, a shadow of that reality, stretched out upon the earth; our true reality is ‘hidden with Christ in God' (Col. 3:3).» — la paradoja con que lo formula: en cierto sentido hay que estar ya siempre allí aunque no se haya llegado dentro de la cronología de este mundo, y la vida en la tierra es sombra de esa realidad

«For in the mystery of this assumption live the nations, who, imitating that soul through faith, come to salvation.» — y quiénes viven bajo esa sombra: las naciones que, imitando aquella alma por la fe, llegan a la salvación

«But we also see many other statements in the divine Scriptures regarding the significance of the word ‘shadow, such as that in the Gospel according to Luke, where Gabriel says to Mary, The Spirit of the Lord will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you [Luke 1:35].» — los otros usos de la palabra sombra que Orígenes reúne, empezando por el anuncio a María

«And the Apostle says of the law that those who have circumcision in the flesh serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things [Heb. 8:5]. And elsewhere it is said, Is not our life upon the earth a shadow? [Job 8:9]» — y los dos restantes: la ley como copia y sombra de lo celeste, y la vida sobre la tierra como sombra

«riddle, but face to face |1 Cor. 13:12] all the saints shall be counted worthy to behold the glory of God and the causes and truth of things. The pledge of this truth already being received through the Holy Spirit, the Apostle said, Even if we had formerly known Christ according to the flesh, we know him thus no longer [2 Cor. 5:16].» — el cierre del capítulo ya en la plana siguiente: cara a cara verán los santos la gloria de Dios y las causas y la verdad de las cosas, y la prenda de esa verdad es el Espíritu, por el que ya no se conoce a Cristo según la carne

«Origen then finishes the chapter with a typical statement of humility: this is what he has in mind to say, but ‘if there is anyone who is able to discover something better and to confirm what he says by clearer statements from the holy Scriptures, let those accounts be received rather than mine.» — la fórmula de humildad con que Orígenes cierra, que Behr llama típica: si alguien puede hallar algo mejor y sostenerlo con enunciados más claros de las Escrituras, que se reciban esas cuentas antes que las suyas

«If this chapter, Princ. 2.6, which we have traced in detail, supplementing it with other texts from Origen himself, and the wider tradition, is what Origen understands by ‘the Incarnation of Christ; it is clearly something other than, in Rowan Williams’ arresting words, ‘an episode in the biography of the Word, as if the task of theology were to narrate an account of a pre-existent, pre-incarnate divine person called the Word, who, at a certain point in time, becomes flesh, by being born as a human being, to return to the Father» — lo que Behr niega que sea la Encarnación en Orígenes: no un episodio de la biografía del Verbo, como si la teología narrara a una persona divina preencarnada que en cierto punto se hace carne y vuelve al Padre. La cita se corta antes de *thirty-three*, que el troceo parte con guion a fin de renglón y el extractor fundiría en una forma que la plana no imprime

«The incoherence of such an approach, which it has to be said, is rather common in theological works, was pointed out by Herbert McCabe, in his insightful essay “The Involvement of God."» — la voz moderna en que se apoya para llamar incoherente ese planteamiento, corriente según él en los trabajos teológicos: Herbert McCabe

«‘It is part of my thesis, McCabe argues, ‘that there is no such thing as the pre-existent Christ’ It was ‘invented, he suggests, in the nineteenth century, ‘as a way of distinguishing the eternal procession of the Son from the incarnation of the Son; that is, to afÏrm that Jesus did not become Son of God in virtue of the incarnation. He was already Son of God before that?"» — la tesis de McCabe que Behr transcribe: no hay tal cosa como el Cristo preexistente, y la noción se inventó en el siglo XIX para distinguir la procesión eterna del Hijo de su encarnación

«Speaking of the Son of God ‘becoming man’ or coming down from heaven, McCabe writes, ‘makes a perfectly good metaphor, but could not literally be true. ‘From the point of view of God, then, sub specie eternitatis, no sense can be given to the idea that at some point in God’s life-story, the Son became incarnate?!» — y lo que de ahí se sigue para el lenguaje del credo: bajar del cielo es buena metáfora, pero no puede ser literalmente verdad, y desde el punto de vista de Dios no cabe un punto de su historia en que el Hijo se encarne

«Yet, from our point of view, in history, McCabe continues, ‘there was certainly a time when Jesus had not yet been born. And so, as McCabe puts it, “Moses could have said with perfect truth “Jesus of Nazareth is not yet” or “Jesus does not exist” because, of course, the future does not exist; this is what makes it future’>» — el contrapeso desde el tiempo: Moisés podría haber dicho con verdad que Jesús no existe todavía, porque el futuro no existe

«Yet while saying ‘Jesus does not exist, Moses could also have simultaneously said truthfully “The Son of God does exist. This, McCabe concedes, might be called the ‘pre-existence of Christ;» — y la simultaneidad que McCabe admite: Moisés podría haber dicho a la vez y con verdad que el Hijo de Dios sí existe

«which simply means eternal; outside time, not a ‘prior existence, the ‘pre’ prefix being added to emphasize the point. McCabes point might have been clearer if instead of speaking about ‘the pre-existent Christ} he had spoken of the ‘pre-incarnate Word, a phrase I have yet to find in patristic literature, though it abounds in secondary scholarship.» — la enmienda que Behr propone al vocabulario de McCabe: hubiera sido más claro hablar del Verbo preencarnado, frase que dice no haber hallado en la literatura patrística aunque abunda en la secundaria

«Indeed, although the creeds do speak of how the Son ‘came down from heaven and was incarnate, which as McCabe suggests is a good metaphor, the subject of the second article of the Creeds of Nicaea and Constantinople, the one who came down from heaven to be incarnate, is not a 'pre-incarnate Word’ (the term ‘Word’ does not even appear in the Creeds), but rather the one subject, the one Lord Jesus Christ.» — y el argumento con que lo apoya: el sujeto del segundo artículo de los credos de Nicea y Constantinopla no es un Verbo preencarnado —la palabra Verbo ni siquiera aparece ahí— sino el único Señor Jesucristo

«The intersection between time and eternity is naturally correlated to the relationship between ‘theology’ and ‘economy, the two levels on which Origen expounds his first principles: in the first, we speak of Christ as divine, in the second we speak of the same Christ as the mediator; but this does not provide a narrative in which a divine subject later becomes human.”» — cómo enlaza eso con la arquitectura de la obra: teología y economía se corresponden con el cruce de tiempo y eternidad, pero no dan una narración en que un sujeto divino se haga después humano

«When McCabe writes that it would be true for Moses, as indeed it would be, to say Jesus does not exist’ or ‘is not yet; although it would also be true for Moses to say ‘It is true now that the Son of God exists, without splitting Jesus and the Son into two different subjects (for it would not be true for Moses to say “The Son of God exists now’), he seems to be pointing towards the same idea that we saw Origen, and Gregory of Nyssa, trying to articulate, that is, that Jesus, as a human being, through the Passion, becomes that which, as God, he always is, outside of time.» — lo que Behr encuentra común a McCabe, a Orígenes y a Gregorio de Nisa: Jesús, como hombre, llega a ser por la Pasión lo que como Dios es siempre, fuera del tiempo

«The Incarnation, therefore, should perhaps be thought of as the enfleshing of the eternal heavenly reality in the assumption of flesh by the eternal Word, which simultaneously (as iron in the fire) transforms the earthly properties of the flesh, through the fire of the Passion, into the very properties of the Word (so that they are no longer seen), as Jesus goes to the Father, preparing the way for others to follow him and in so doing ministering divinity and the anointing to them, so that the eternal reality of the heavenly court and its liturgy is enfleshed in those who follow him.» — la definición de Encarnación que Behr propone en consecuencia: el encarnarse de la realidad celeste eterna en la asunción de la carne, que a la vez transforma las propiedades terrenas por el fuego de la Pasión, para que la liturgia de la corte celeste se encarne en quienes lo siguen

«This ministerial character of Christ's activity, and, indeed, identity, is extended by Origen, in his Commentary on John, to include his, and our, being God and gods.» — hasta dónde extiende Orígenes ese carácter ministerial en el Comentario a Juan, según Behr: hasta el ser Dios y dioses, él y nosotros

«1 think that Jeremiah the prophet also, understanding what was the nature of the Wisdom of God in him, which was also the same which he had assumed for the salvation of the world, said, The breath of our face, Christ the Lord, of whom we said that under his shadow we shall live among the nations [Lam. 4:20]. For just as the shadow of our body is inseparable from the body, and assumes and performs the movements and gestures of our body without deviation,» — el pasaje de la sombra con que Orígenes cierra su capítulo económico: Jeremías llama a Cristo el aliento de nuestro rostro, bajo cuya sombra viviremos entre las naciones, y la sombra del cuerpo es inseparable del cuerpo. El troceo imprime una cifra donde la plana lleva el pronombre de primera persona

«so I think that the prophet, wishing to indicate the work and movement of Christ’s soul, which was inseparably attached to him and accomplished everything according to his movement and will, called this the shadow of Christ the Lord, under whose shadow we were to live among the nations.» — y a qué llama sombra: al alma de Cristo, inseparablemente unida a él y que todo lo cumplía según su movimiento y voluntad

«Eternity is not, of course, a very long time; it is not time at all ... Eternity is not timeless in the sense that an instant is timeless. ... No: eternity is timeless because it totally transcends time.!9» — y el motivo: la eternidad no es un tiempo muy largo ni es tiempo en absoluto, y no es intemporal como lo es un instante, sino que trasciende el tiempo por completo

«meaning that at an earlier time in our history (and there isn't any time except in history) these propositions would both have been true: Jesus does not exist, "Ihe Son of God does exist; thus apparently making a distinction between the existence of Jesus and the existence of the Son of God.» — la distinción exacta en que McCabe funda todo, primer tramo: en tiempos de Moisés eran verdaderas a la vez la proposición de que Jesús no existe y la de que el Hijo de Dios existe

«Their way of expressing this point, however, focuses our attention much more strictly upon the Cross, seeing the life of Jesus always in that light,» — la diferencia que Behr señala entre los antiguos y McCabe: ellos fijan la atención mucho más estrictamente en la cruz y leen a esa luz la vida de Jesús

«Passion demonstrates his resurrection in those who follow him by taking up the Cross.’» — el remate de esa definición al otro lado del corte de plana: la Pasión muestra su resurrección en quienes lo siguen tomando la cruz

«The surprise that will no doubt be caused by the claim that the idea of a ‘pre-existent’ or, better, ‘pre-incarnate’ divine Word is incoherent, or perhaps rather, mythological, is likely to be matched by the surprise that, despite all the discussion about Origen’s teaching on ‘the pre-existence of souls’ or ‘pre-existent souls’ (or, for that matter, ‘pre-existent intellects’), these phrases do not, as Harl points out, actually occur in the writings of Origen.’» — el hallazgo negativo con que Behr abre la última sección, tomado de Harl y consignado como tal: las expresiones preexistencia de las almas, almas preexistentes e intelectos preexistentes no aparecen en los escritos de Orígenes

«In Contra Celsum, Origen emphatically maintains that he is not teaching some kind of Platonic transmigration of souls, ‘but a different and more sublime view’ (Cels. 4.17).» — la negativa expresa del propio Orígenes que aduce: no enseña una transmigración platónica de las almas sino una posición distinta y más elevada

«That this is not some kind of later retraction is made clear by a similar statement in his Commentary on John, where he contrasts the idea of souls transmigrating from one body to another (μετενσωμάτωσις) with ‘embodiment’ (évocouáreo cis).» — y el segundo testimonio con que descarta que sea retractación tardía: en el Comentario a Juan contrapone la transmigración de un cuerpo a otro y el encarnarse. El troceo corrompe las dos palabras griegas

«What gave rise to this incorrect shorthand is likely Origen’s repeated references to 'antecedent causes' that result in the different position of intellectual beings within the cosmos.» — de dónde salió entonces la fórmula, según Behr: de las referencias repetidas de Orígenes a causas antecedentes que explican la posición distinta de los seres intelectuales

«Before we tackle this question, however, we would do well to remind ourselves that Origen consistently begins any discussion about the beginning of things by looking towards the end.» — y el recordatorio que antepone: Orígenes empieza siempre cualquier discusión sobre el principio de las cosas mirando al fin

«Although he does indeed claim that ‘the end is always like the beginning’ he does not start from ‘the beginning, but rather looks to the end, when all things are brought into subjection to God, in order to search for some idea of the beginning.» — la precisión de Behr sobre esa regla: aunque diga que el fin es semejante al principio, Orígenes no parte del principio, sino que mira al fin para buscar alguna idea del principio

«If the end is to be this unity of all in God and as God (for God will indeed be all in all), now ‘enfleshed’ by the assumption of flesh into this heavenly reality (as iron in fire), then the beginning of all things is also to be understood as a unity.» — y lo que de ahí se sigue: si el fin es la unidad de todo en Dios y como Dios, ya encarnada por la asunción de la carne en esa realidad celeste, también el principio ha de entenderse como unidad

«There is, of course, an anti-Gnostic thrust to what Origen repeatedly says throughout On First Principles: God is not an arbitrary despot who wilfully creates different beings of diverse natures.’» — el frente polémico que Behr reconoce en la obra: un empuje antignóstico, dirigido contra la idea de un Dios déspota arbitrario que crea a capricho seres de naturalezas diversas

«But, if God is not the cause of the variety (and much suffering and misery), then the cause must result from ourselves, while God is the one who is able to arrange all things, as vessels of honour and vessels of dishonour, in the same house, such that each is able to purge itself from dishonourable things to become ‘a vessel unto honour, sanctified and useful to the master, prepared for every good work’ (1 Tim. 2:20-1, Princ. 3.1.21).» — y la alternativa que Orígenes plantea: si Dios no es causa de la variedad, la causa ha de venir de nosotros, y Dios es quien dispone los vasos de honra y de deshonra en la misma casa para que cada uno pueda purgarse

«With this assertion from Paul, Origen continues, ‘it does not seem absurd, when we are discussing antecedent causes in the same order and by the same method, to think in the same manner regarding souls, that this is the reason why Jacob was loved even before he was born into this world and Esau hated while he was still held in the womb of his mother’ (Princ. 3.1.22).» — el paso que da a continuación, que es donde entran las causas antecedentes: no le parece absurdo pensar del mismo modo sobre las almas, y por eso Jacob fue amado antes de nacer y Esaú aborrecido en el vientre

«P. Tzamalikos treatment of Origens understanding of the relationship between time and eternity, in his own re-reading of Origen, can help us greatly in understanding these ‘antecedent causes.’» — la lectura moderna en que Behr se apoya para esas causas: la de Tzamalikos sobre el tiempo y la eternidad en Orígenes

«Tzamalikos points out that, for Origen: "The view of time as the continuum where divine and creaturely will encounter each other proves the finiteness of the world. If the world were infinite, there would be no foreknowledge’» — el argumento que le toma: el tiempo como continuo donde se encuentran la voluntad divina y la creatural prueba la finitud del mundo, porque en un mundo infinito no habría presciencia

«This is not because, as we noted earlier had become the charge against Origen, he holds that 'God cannot comprehend the infinite, but because in that case "foreknowledge" would make no sense.» — y la enmienda que con ello hace al cargo corriente: no es que Dios no pueda comprender lo infinito, sino que en ese caso la presciencia no tendría sentido

«If Origen begins by contemplating the end, that is because there is an end, and this end makes a beginning possible, as well as giving coherence and purpose to what happens. Action is meaningful, since this is subject to judgement and has an eschatological perspective’» — lo que el fin hace posible, ya en la plana siguiente: hace posible un principio y da coherencia y propósito a lo que ocurre, porque la acción es significativa al estar sujeta a juicio

«But this means, as Tzamalikos points out later, though odd as it may appear, the prospective fulfilment of certain prophecy is the cause, whereas the utterance of prophecy is the result, although it temporally precedes the event itself. ... it is the future that determines the past.!®» — la consecuencia más fuerte de esa lectura: el cumplimiento futuro de una profecía es la causa y su enunciación el resultado, aunque preceda temporalmente, de modo que es el futuro el que determina el pasado

«We say that the one who made the prediction was not the cause of the future event, because he foretold that it would happen; but we hold that the future event, which would have taken place even if it had not been prophesied, constitutes the cause of its prediction by the one with foreknowledge.» — el pasaje de Contra Celso en que eso se apoya, en la voz de Orígenes: el que predijo no es causa del suceso futuro, sino que el suceso, que habría ocurrido igual sin profecía, es causa de su predicción

«It is because Christ died on the cross that the prophets spoke about this, not because they spoke about it that he then died, and, in fact, when they spoke about it, they did so, as we noted earlier, as a past event, and, given that its happening is the'cause of the prophecy, Christ himself speaks of it as an eternal "necessity (cf. Luke 24:26).» — cómo Behr lo aplica al caso central: los profetas hablaron de la cruz porque Cristo murió en ella, no murió porque ellos hablaran, y por eso hablaron de ello como de un hecho pasado y Cristo lo llama necesidad

«The answer to this question is that this causality, although manifest in history, is in fact a causality between time and timelessness. Prophecy is uttered by a prophet, who ‘looks to the future’ [Comm. Rom. 7.19.2], yet it is God who speaks through the prophet. What is uttered originates in God's own foreknowledge. Prophecy as a result, although manifested in time, actually springs from timelessness.'*» — la respuesta de Tzamalikos que Behr transcribe: es una causalidad entre el tiempo y lo intemporal, porque lo que la profecía enuncia se origina en la presciencia de Dios

«Tzamalikos analysis of the function of foreknowledge and prophecy, within the framework of a definite time-frame, with a beginning and end, is readily applicable to the 'antecedent causes' spoken about by Origen: their anteriority is not simply chronological, but always related to the timelessness of God's foreknowledge.» — y cómo lo traslada a las causas antecedentes: su anterioridad no es simplemente cronológica sino relativa a la intemporalidad de la presciencia de Dios

«Rather than imagining a host of eternally existing intellects who through some pre-cosmic fall descend into bodies, it seems more probable that the ‘antecedent causes’ invoked by Origen to reconcile the inequality of human fate with an afÏrmation of the justice of God refers to the anteriority of the foreknowledge of God, who knows all things for each from their womb.'?» — la tesis que Behr firma contra el cargo: en vez de una hueste de intelectos eternamente existentes que caen en cuerpos por una caída precósmica, las causas antecedentes remiten a la anterioridad de la presciencia de Dios

«Seeing, then, that such is the end, when all enemies will be subjected to Christ, and when the last enemy, death, will be destroyed and when the kingdom shall be delivered to the God and Father by Christ, to whom all things have been subjected icf. 1 Cor 15:24-7], let us, I say, from such an end as this contemplate the beginning of things.» — el enunciado más pleno de ese método, en la voz de Orígenes: visto el fin, cuando todos los enemigos estén sujetos a Cristo y el último enemigo, la muerte, sea destruido, contémplese desde ahí el principio de las cosas. El pasaje vuelve en el cuerpo del volumen

«For the end is always like the beginning, and, therefore, as there is one end of all things, so ought there to be understood one beginning of all things, and as there is one end of many things, so also from one beginning there are many differences and varieties, which, in turn, through the goodness of God and by subjection to Christ and through the unity of the Holy Spirit, are recalled to one end which is like the beginning:» — la regla que enuncia: el fin es siempre semejante al principio, y como hay un fin de todas las cosas ha de entenderse un principio de todas, del que salen muchas diferencias que vuelven a un fin semejante al principio. También vuelve en el cuerpo

«those, that is, who from that one beginning, each one variously led by his own impulse, were arranged in different orders according to their merit, for goodness does not exist in them essentially, as it does in God and his Christ and the Holy Spirit.» — y el resto de la frase, ya en la plana siguiente: dispuestos en órdenes distintos según su mérito, llevado cada uno por su propio impulso, porque la bondad no está en ellos esencialmente como en Dios, en su Cristo y en el Espíritu Santo. Vuelve en el cuerpo

«has for describing the different aspects of God's creation. To summarize (and extrapolate) what we saw earlier: God has called or elected all to existence in the heavenly court from before the foundation of the world. Seeing to what they are called is a cause for scandal and falling away, with the result that we come to be in temporal existence: the world itself is thrown down, and we come into existence in time, fashioned or moulded from the dust of the earth.» — el resumen con que Behr enlaza los distintos verbos de creación: Dios llamó a todos a la existencia en la corte celeste antes de la fundación del mundo, y ver a qué se los llama es ocasión de escándalo y de caída, con lo que el mundo es arrojado abajo y se viene a la existencia en el tiempo

«As this happens, the lamb is also ‘slain from the foundation of the world? Yet, at the same time, through the slaying of the Lamb within time at the Passion, at which all fall away (with the notable exception of the beloved disciple in the Gospel of John the Theologian), we are, in fact, brought to participate in the heavenly liturgy through, and requiring, our own taking up the cross.» — y la simultaneidad que sostiene toda su lectura: el cordero es degollado desde la fundación del mundo, y por ese mismo degüello en el tiempo, en la Pasión, se llega a participar de la liturgia celeste tomando la cruz

«In all of this, one must bear in mind, however, that Origen is differentiating between different aspects (as with the different titles of God and Christ, and the different words for creation) of one and the same eternal reality, not narrating a mythology.» — la advertencia con que cierra el punto: Orígenes distingue aspectos de una misma realidad eterna, y no narra una mitología

«Origen did not teach that there was a crucifixion in the heavens before that on earth, as Jerome alleges (Ruf. 1.20):» — en nota, la negativa expresa de Behr frente a Jerónimo: Orígenes no enseñó que hubiera una crucifixión en los cielos antes de la de la tierra

«Origen’s predecessor in Alexandria, Clement, had already appealed to the paradoxical intersection between time and eternity to explain what happens sacramentally in the life and being of the newly baptized and those who have grown to become mature in their faith.» — el precedente alejandrino que Behr trae: Clemente ya recurría al cruce paradójico de tiempo y eternidad para explicar lo que ocurre sacramentalmente en el bautizado

«‘Being baptized, we are illumined; illumined we become sons; being made sons, we are perfected; being perfected we are made immortal. ^I have said’, he says, “that you are gods, sons of the Most High" (Paed. 1.6.26.1; Ps. 81:6).» — la cadena de Clemente que cita: bautizados somos iluminados, iluminados nos hacemos hijos, hechos hijos somos perfeccionados, perfeccionados somos hechos inmortales

«Christians are, he says, already, here and now (ἐνθένδε ἤδη), practising the heavenly life by which they are deified (Paed. 1.12.98.3).» — y lo que Clemente les atribuye ya aquí y ahora: practicar la vida celeste por la que son deificados. El griego entre paréntesis es el que imprime la plana

«The word for this ‘anticipation’ of our eschatological reality, already real in faith, is the same term, πρόληψις, that, as we saw earlier when considering Aristotelian and Hellenistic epistemology, was used, as it is by Clement himself (especially in Strom. 2), to refer to the generic notions, ‘presuppositions, synthesized out of repeated sense-perceptions, which alone make knowledge possible.» — el enlace que Behr encuentra entre esa anticipación y la epistemología antes expuesta: es la misma palabra que designaba las nociones genéricas sintetizadas de percepciones repetidas, las únicas que hacen posible el conocimiento

«Its use here, in a sacramental context, gives further substance to what that might be for the baptized: ‘faith is the substance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen’ (Heb. 11:1).» — y lo que gana la palabra al usarse en contexto sacramental, según Behr: la fe como sustancia de lo que se espera y convicción de lo que no se ve

«The mature, perfected Christian, the ‘Gnostic; ‘is already in the midst of that which will be, anticipating hope by gnosis, for ‘through love the future is already present for him?!» — el nombre que Clemente da al cristiano maduro y lo que le atribuye: está ya en medio de lo que será, anticipando la esperanza por gnosis, porque por amor el futuro le es ya presente

«For such Gnostics, their whole life is one unceasing festival: “Holding festival, then, in our whole life, persuaded that God is altogether on every side present, we cultivate our fields praising; we sail the sea, hymning; in all the rest of our conversation we conduct ourselves according to the rule’ (Strom. 7.7.35.6).» — y cómo describe su vida entera: una fiesta sin interrupción, cultivando los campos con alabanza y navegando el mar con himnos

«This is the activity of the perfected Gnostic, to have converse with God through the great High Priest, being made like the Lord, as far as may be, by means of the whole service [θεραπεία] towards God, [a service] which tends to the salvation of human beings, through care of the goodness towards us, and on the other side, through liturgy, through teaching and through beneficence in deeds. Being assimilated to God, the Gnostic even creates and fashions himself [éavróv κτίζει καὶ δημιουργεῖ], and adorns those who hear him; assimilating, as far as possible, by an ascesis that tends to apatheia, to him who is by nature impassible; and this is uninterrupted converse and communion with the Lord.» — el pasaje de Clemente que Behr tiene por más sorprendente: asimilado a Dios, el gnóstico incluso se crea y se fabrica a sí mismo, y eso es trato y comunión ininterrumpidos con el Señor. Los corchetes con griego son los que imprime la plana

«With the future already present for him, when he will be deified (or rather already is, though it is always difÏcult to know to what extent Clement is describing an idealized portrait), the mature, perfected Christian shares in the activity of God, even to the point of creating himself:» — lo que Behr saca de ahí, con su propia reserva sobre cuánto hay de retrato ideal en Clemente: el cristiano perfeccionado participa de la actividad de Dios hasta el punto de crearse a sí mismo

«It is, then, in the earthly liturgy that we most closely approximate, are ‘images’ or ‘icons’ of our eternal reality, ‘mystically imaging [μυστικῶς eikovitovres] the Cherubim as the ‘Cherubic hymn’ in the Liturgies of John Chrysostom and Basil (referred to earlier) puts it.» — dónde sitúa Behr la mayor aproximación a esa realidad eterna: en la liturgia terrestre, donde se imagina místicamente a los querubines, como dice el himno querubínico

«Speaking of Christians in worship as ‘icons of the cherubim is not meant to imply that our end is to become angels (it is rather to become created human beings), but just as when iron and bronze, to extend Origen's analogy, are placed in a fire, they become indistinguishable from the fire and from each other, so too there are no distinctions in» — y la precisión que añade para que no se entienda mal: decir que los cristianos en el culto son iconos de los querubines no implica que el fin sea volverse ángeles, sino llegar a ser seres humanos creados. El tramo se corta en el cambio de plana

«about what liturgy was like in the time of Origen, but it does seem to be the case that the introduction of the Sanctus in the liturgy goes back to the period just after Origen, while the idea of participation in the heavenly liturgy is intimated by various writers before him, picking up on apocalyptic themes from Second Temple Judaism.'^» — la cautela histórica de Behr sobre la liturgia de la época: el Sanctus entra poco después de Orígenes, y la idea de participar en la liturgia celeste la insinúan escritores anteriores recogiendo temas apocalípticos del judaísmo del Segundo Templo

«In Christ the space of heaven and the region of earth are united. In the eucharist the worshipper enters heaven through Christ, and is represented by the High Priest. Here time and eternity intersect and become one, and this world and the world to come elide.'®» — la formulación de Bryan Spinks que cita: en la eucaristía el que adora entra en el cielo por Cristo, y ahí tiempo y eternidad se cruzan y se hacen uno

«I have intimated, sometimes overtly, throughout this Introduction, that there are apocalyptic dimensions to Origen's theology and his On First Principles. Now that we have come to the end of the Introduction, it might be helpful to lay out more fully these apocalyptic dimensions.» — Behr declara el hilo que ha venido insinuando en toda la introducción y se dispone a exponerlo: las dimensiones apocalípticas de la teología de Orígenes

«The best context for understanding the apocalyptic framework is the ‘correspondence’ and ‘two-level drama that John Ashton, in his work on the Gospel of John, describes as being one of the four key elements of apocalyptic: two of which are temporal, two ages (mystery) and two stages (dream or vision), and two are spatial, insiders/ outsiders (riddle) and above/below (correspondence).» — el marco que adopta, tomado de John Ashton: los cuatro elementos de lo apocalíptico, dos temporales —dos edades y dos etapas— y dos espaciales —dentro y fuera, y arriba y abajo

«According to Ashton, the effect of Christ’s riddling discourse and the Messianic Secret, whereby the readers of the Gospel know, and therefore see, more than the disciples within the narrative, is to set up a two-level drama in a framework of correspondence.» — el efecto que Ashton atribuye al discurso enigmático de Cristo y al secreto mesiánico: el lector sabe y ve más que los discípulos del relato, con lo que se monta un drama en dos niveles

«This element of correspondence is found in most apocalyptic literature, especially clearly in the ‘Similitudes of the Enochic material. Although there is some debate about how to translate the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Ethiopic terms, Ashton is probably right to suggest that ‘correspondence’ is the best rendering, not least because it brings out a further element of the riddling discourse of Christ: παραβολή literally means a ‘juxtaposition, with a consequent ‘comparison or ‘analogy, so entailing a ‘correspondence.’» — y por qué correspondencia es la mejor traducción según Ashton: porque la palabra griega de parábola significa literalmente yuxtaposición, con la comparación o analogía consiguiente

«In the Enochic material, the term ‘correspondence’ is used to compare and liken things on earth and things in heaven, establishing connections between the realm above and» — el uso enóquico del término: comparar y asemejar las cosas de la tierra y las del cielo, trazando conexiones entre los dos ámbitos

«For Enoch, and for apocalyptic writers generally, there are not two worlds but one: or rather the whole of reality is split into matching pairs (rather like the biological theory of DNA) in which one half, the lower, is the mirror-image (albeit in this case a distorting mirror) of the higher. That is why a revelation of what is above is not just relevant or related to what happens or is about to happen on earth: rather what happens on earth is a re-enactment in earthly terms of what has happened in heaven: a correspondence!» — la formulación de Ashton que Behr transcribe: no hay dos mundos sino uno, partido en pares que se corresponden, y lo que ocurre en la tierra es una reescenificación en términos terrenos de lo que ha ocurrido en el cielo

«There is one reality, as we emphasized when looking at different verbs Origen used for ‘creation, which are but aspects of the singular work of God.» — y el eco que Behr le encuentra en su propia lectura: hay una sola realidad, como al mirar los distintos verbos de creación, que son aspectos de la obra única de Dios

«John did not create the literary form of the two-level drama. It was at home in the thought-world of Jewish apocalypticism: the dicta most basic to the apocalyptic thinker are these: God created both heaven and earth. There are dramas taking place both on the heavenly stage and on the earthly stage. Yet these dramas are not really two, but rather one drama. ...» — la visión estereóptica de J. Louis Martyn que cita: el drama en dos niveles estaba ya en el mundo del apocalipticismo judío, y los dos dramas no son dos sino uno

«One might say that events on the heavenly stage not only correspond to events on the earthly stage, but also slightly precede them in time, leading them into existence, so to speak. What transpires on the heavenly stage is often called ‘things to come. For that reason events seen on the earthly stage are entirely enigmatic to the man who sees only the earthly stage. Stereoptic vision is necessary, and it is precisely stereoptic vision which causes a man to write an apocalypse: After this I looked, and lo, in heaven an open door! And the first voice, which I had heard ... said,“Come up hither and I will show you what must take place after this?!» — y el matiz temporal que Martyn añade: los sucesos del escenario celeste preceden ligeramente a los del terrestre y los llevan a la existencia, de modo que el que solo ve el escenario terrestre halla todo enigmático

«To see this, we need ‘stereoptic vision, or ‘a divine sense; in the words of Solomon used by Origen. We are participants in both simultaneously, through the paradoxical intersection of (non-temporal) eternity and time.» — y qué hace falta para verlo: visión estereóptica, o el sentido divino de Salomón que Orígenes usa, porque participamos de los dos a la vez

«This is not, Origen insists, a realm of Platonic ‘forms, nor a bodiless world that only exists in our imagination; and neither is it a Platonic myth of transmigration, in which the soul falls from the vaults of heaven, but a different and more sublime view.”» — las tres negativas que Behr subraya en Orígenes: ni un reino de formas platónicas, ni un mundo incorpóreo existente solo en la imaginación, ni el mito platónico de la transmigración

«The manuscripts of Rufinus’ Latin translation of Origen’s On First Principles, utilized in this edition, are listed below, together with the letter by which they are indicated in the critical apparatus. There are altogether thirty-four manuscripts of On First Principles identified by Koetschau, which he described and discussed extensively (pp. xxi-xivi, description; pp. xivi-xcv, discussion), selecting the seven most important codices for establishing his edition» — el estado de la transmisión manuscrita que Behr consigna: treinta y cuatro manuscritos identificados por Koetschau, de los que él seleccionó los siete más importantes

«In working out the relationships between the codices, Koetschau postulated the existence of a source, which he names the Codex Lucullanus, as the archetype of the subsequent manuscript tradition.» — la hipótesis de Koetschau sobre el arquetipo de esa tradición, que Behr consigna como postulada

«Another manuscript, the Codex Guelferbytanus 4141 (Weissenburger 57), unknown to Koetschau, was introduced by Górgemanns and Karpp in their edition (1976).» — el manuscrito que Koetschau no conoció y que la edición alemana introdujo

«Finally, and most recently, Fernandez identified, in a sixth- or early seventh-century codex containing sermons attributed to Basil, Parisinus Latinus 10593, Rufinus Latin translation of Princ. 2.6, with the title Sermo de incarnatione Domini, and incorporated its readings into his own edition (2015).» — el hallazgo más reciente que Behr recoge: Fernández identificó en un códice del siglo VI o VII la traducción latina de 2.6 bajo el título de un sermón sobre la encarnación del Señor

«The value of this witness is twofold. First, it is several centuries earlier than any previous witness to Rufinus translation, with several variations not found in the other witnesses, and thereby also provides a testimony to the translation independent of the postulated Codex Lucullanus and its derivatives. Second, it demonstrates that parts of Origens work were circulating as independent texts.» — el doble valor que Behr le da: es varios siglos anterior a cualquier otro testigo y muestra que partes de la obra circulaban como textos independientes

«Fernandez also had recourse to the extract from Princ. 3.1.6-8, discovered in the late 1970s by K. A. Worp and K. Treu in a papyrus in Amsterdam, dating to the third or fourth century. Again, this contains no serious variations, but does demonstrate the stability of the Greek text.» — y el segundo testigo antiguo: un extracto en papiro de Ámsterdam, del siglo III o IV, que no trae variantes serias pero muestra la estabilidad del texto griego

«I have followed previous editors in adopting the schema that has been worked out and refined over the course of the century since Koetschau, and, of course, am heavily indebted to them for their work.» — la deuda que Behr declara con los editores anteriores y el esquema que adopta de ellos

«Codex Parisinus Latinus 10593. 6th cent. (Only Princ. 2.6) Codex Augiensis 160. 10th cent. Codex Guelferbytanus 4141 (Weissenburger 57). 10th cent. Codex Bambergensis B IV 27 (953). 11th cent. Codex Casinensis 343. 10th-11th cent. Codex Parisinus Sangermanensis Lat. 12125. 9th cent. Codex Metensis 225. 10th cent. Codex Abrincensis 66. 13th cent. Codex Parisinus Sorbonicus Lat. 16322. 13th cent.» — la lista de los códices que sostienen esta edición, del siglo VI al XIII. En la plana esta lista corre junto a dos columnas de siglas y fechas que el troceo entrevera, de modo que solo se cita la columna de los nombres

«In addition to the manuscripts, Rufinus translation of On First Principles is also indirectly witnessed by the following sources; several of these have been newly edited, and so, along with Fernandez, I have been able to work with better editions of these texts than were previous editors.» — el segundo tipo de testimonio que Behr usa: los testigos indirectos, varios de ellos en ediciones mejores que las que tuvieron los editores anteriores

«Of these indirect witness, the most important and extensive are Pamphilus Apology for Origen and the intriguing work On the Incarnation and the Deity of Christ to Januarius, ascribed to Augustine.» — cuáles son los dos más importantes: la Apología por Orígenes de Pánfilo y la obra sobre la encarnación y la deidad de Cristo dirigida a Januario, atribuida a Agustín. El troceo imprime *witness* en singular

«The Apology was written during the time that Pamphilus of Caesarea was imprisoned, that is, from November 307 until his martyrdom on 16 February 310. The five books of his Apology were written with the assistance of Eusebius, who composed a sixth book after Pamphilus death.» — las circunstancias de esa Apología: escrita en prisión entre noviembre de 307 y el martirio de Pánfilo en febrero de 310, con ayuda de Eusebio, que añadió un sexto libro

«The occasion for the Apology was a number of charges raised against the teachings of Origen, aligning it with the teaching of Paul of Samosata, who had been condemned in the previous century, and this caused some consternation amongst the Egyptian confessors who had been imprisoned in Palestine.'» — y el motivo: cargos contra las enseñanzas de Orígenes que las alineaban con las de Pablo de Samosata, condenado el siglo anterior

«Only the first book of the Apology survives, translated by Rufinus, before he turned to the larger task of translating On First Principles? The first book of the Apology contains seventy extracts from a wide range of the works of Origen, twenty-seven of which come from On First Principles.» — lo que de ella queda y lo que aporta: solo el primer libro, traducido por Rufino, con setenta extractos de obras de Orígenes, veintisiete de esta

«They often vary from the translation Rufinus would subsequently give of On First Principles as a whole, though in no particularly significant details, thus witnessing the stability of both the Greek text, in the form that Pamphilus worked with and then that which Rufinus worked from later, and also Rufinus own translation practice.» — y lo que Behr concluye de compararlos: varían a menudo sin detalles significativos, lo que atestigua la estabilidad del texto griego y la práctica traductora de Rufino

«That the passages are extracted from Rufinus translation means that it cannot be dated any earlier than the beginning of the fifth century.» — el término post quem que se deriva de su contenido: como los pasajes salen de la traducción de Rufino, no puede datarse antes de comienzos del siglo V

«Giulia Sfameni Gasparro suggested that it was compiled in the years before the sixth-century condemnation of Origen, to defend his orthodoxy.’» — la primera hipótesis sobre su propósito, la de Sfameni Gasparro: compilada antes de la condena del siglo VI para defender la ortodoxia de Orígenes

«However, as Dorbauer points out, Koetschau dated his conjectured ‘Codex Lucullanus' to a period after Origens condemnation, and so the work To Januarius must also be later. Noting the similarity of its readings to those of the a group of manuscripts, deriving from a common, at the latest seventh-century source, Dorbauer’s conclusion is that this work must in fact be an anti-Origenist tract prepared after his condemnation.» — y la contraria, la de Dorbauer, que Behr pone al lado sin arbitrar: un tratado antiorigenista preparado después de la condena

«Nothing more can really be discerned from the text, other than that, as the manuscripts indicate, it originated in France, as early as the century following Origens condemnation or as late as the Carolingian period.» — el límite que Behr declara para esa cuestión: nada más cabe discernir del texto sino que, por los manuscritos, se originó en Francia

«Thus the cause both for diversification as well as unification, in a movement that gives flesh to the heavenly reality (and transforms that flesh into an eternal state) is the self-sacrificial love that is divine life, celebrated eternally in the heavens, but taking on the character of the slaying of the Lamb as those called to the feast fall away, both eternally in the heavens and in time on earth.» — la causa única que da a las dos cosas: el amor que se sacrifica a sí mismo y es la vida divina, celebrado eternamente en los cielos y con figura de degüello del Cordero cuando los llamados al banquete caen

«There is nothing intermediate between light and darkness. But the end is reserved till the resurrection of those who believe, and it is not the reception of some other thing, but the obtaining of the promise previously made. For we do not say that both take place at the same time—both the arrival at the end and the anticipation of that arrival. For eternity and time are not the same,» — la explicación de Clemente sobre el neófito ya perfecto, primer tramo: el fin queda reservado a la resurrección, y no se dan a la vez la llegada al fin y su anticipación, porque eternidad y tiempo no son lo mismo

«Faith, so to speak, is the attempt generated in time; the final result is the attainment of the promise secured for eternity. ... having in anticipation grasped by faith that which is future, after the resurrection we receive it as present.!*?» — y su segundo tramo: la fe es el intento engendrado en el tiempo y el resultado final es la obtención de la promesa asegurada para la eternidad, de modo que lo asido por anticipación se recibe como presente tras la resurrección

«Martyn and Ashton are concerned with the narrativity of the Gospel of John: how a drama is unfolded over time and the correlation of the two stages of understanding with the history of the community in which the Gospel was written. However, as we attempt to understand Origen, what is important is the idea of correspondence,» — lo que Behr deja de esos dos autores y lo que toma: a ellos les ocupa la narratividad del Evangelio de Juan, y a él le importa la idea de correspondencia

«for Origen, between the end and the beginning, the above and the below, heaven and earth, that which is unseen and that which is seen (the fundamental distinction, according to Gregory of Nyssa, prior even to the difference between created and uncreated)—two realms which, as different as they are in our present experience, are ultimately, eschatologically, one and the same, for ‘God will be all in all.» — y entre qué términos: el fin y el principio, lo de arriba y lo de abajo, cielo y tierra, lo no visto y lo visto, dos ámbitos que escatológicamente son uno y el mismo

«It is, I would suggest, an apocalyptic vision created by the intersection of eternity and time, with the former opened up to us in and through the Passion of Christ, while we yet remain in the latter.» — lo que Behr propone en su lugar, firmándolo: una visión apocalíptica nacida del cruce de eternidad y tiempo, con la primera abierta en la Pasión de Cristo mientras seguimos en la segunda

«We are, simultaneously, in both; and we are brought into close approximation with our true being, now ‘hidden with Christ in God, in the earthly liturgy, which is an image of the heavenly liturgy. Our end, in Christ, is to be a participant in the heavenly court, celebrating the heavenly liturgy in the eternity of God; and although this will only be a ‘present reality; as it were, for us after our sojourn (and being fashioned) upon earth, yet as an eternal reality, we are always already there, and have always been so.» — y el corolario: acercados a nuestro verdadero ser, escondido con Cristo en Dios, en la liturgia terrestre que es imagen de la celeste, ya estamos siempre allí y siempre lo hemos estado

«The work To Januarius is an intriguing and enigmatic work, consisting almost solely of passages from On First Principles. ‘Ihe first critical edition of this work, that of Dorbauer, is based upon twelve manuscripts, the oldest dating to the thirteenth century, though there was one from the tenth century that is now lost.» — la segunda obra y su base manuscrita: doce manuscritos, el más antiguo del siglo XIII, más uno del X hoy perdido

«(Ps. Augustine) Ad Ianuarium Princ. Pr.4 (species ... testamenti) Pr.4 (tum ... sanctum) PrA (sane .. . praedicatur) Pr.5 (post ... gloria) Pr.5 (est ... distinguitur) Pr.6 (de ... nuncupantur) Pr.7 (est... . profertur) Pr.8 (tum ... condonatur) Pr.10 (est ... distinguitur) Pr.10 (oportet ... reppererit) 1.2.2 (nos ... species) 1.2.3 (quali ... interpres) 1.2.3 (Iohannes ... potest) 1.2.4 (hic ... sapientia) 1.2.4 (via ... colorem) 1.2.4-5 (verum ... dicitur)» — arranca la concordancia entre la obra dirigida a Januario y los lugares de esta obra; el tramo citado corre por la columna de las referencias a los primeros principios, con las palabras latinas de apertura y cierre de cada extracto, porque el troceo entrevera las dos columnas de la tabla

«2.6.3 (igitur ... dicatur) 2.8 (1-39) 2.6.4 (propheta ... iniquitate) 2.8 (39-57) 2.6.5 (quodsi ... peccati) 2.9 (1-16) 2.6.6 (ad ... capaces) 2.10 (1-37) 2.6.7 (arbitror ... novimus) 2.11 (1-35) 2.6.7 (haec ... recipiantur)» — el tramo de esa misma concordancia que corresponde al capítulo económico sobre Cristo, con siete extractos tomados de él, lo que mide cuánto pesó ese capítulo en la transmisión indirecta

«The following abbreviations have been used for the editions of Princ. Merl — Merlin (1512) Del Delarue (1733) Koe Koetschau (1913) Sim Simonetti- Crouzel (1978) Goe Górgemanns-Karpp (1992, 3rd edn) Fern Fernandez (2015)» — las seis ediciones que Behr abrevia en su aparato, de Merlin en 1512 a Fernández en 2015, que es la serie entera de la que ha venido hablando

«As Koetschau was working on the manuscripts of the Philocalia in preparation for his edition of Origen’s Contra Celsum, unknown to him was the fact that Joseph Armitage Robinson was also engaged in the same task in Cambridge. When they found out about each other’s work, they agreed to publish their results independently: Robinson's edition of the Philocalia in 1893, and Koetschau's edition of Contra Celsum in 1899.» — la anécdota editorial que Behr consigna sobre la Filocalia: Koetschau y Joseph Armitage Robinson trabajaban lo mismo sin saberlo, y al enterarse acordaron publicar por separado

«For his edition, Robinson consulted more than fifty manuscripts, and provided a very full description of each and discussion about their relationship, identifying those listed below as the most important, and providing a schema which, with slight modifications, has served as the basis for subsequent work.» — lo que Robinson aportó: más de cincuenta manuscritos descritos y un esquema que, con ligeras modificaciones, sigue siendo la base del trabajo posterior

«The numeration of the sections in each chapter of the Philocalia as presented by the various editors differs slightly from that found in editions of On First Principles. As this has become rather cumbersome (leading to two if not three numbers given for each section), and as the passages from the Philocalia found also in On First Principles are always cited as coming from On First Principles, and, finally, as it is a simple matter to locate each section, | have not reproduced the varying section numbers particular to the Philocalia itself.» — y la decisión editorial que Behr declara y razona: no reproduce la numeración propia de la Filocalia, porque daría dos o tres cifras por sección y los pasajes se citan siempre por esta obra

«Codex Patmiacus, gr. 270. 10th cent. Codex Venetus Marcianus gr. 47. 11th cent. Codex Parisinus Suppl. gr. 615. 13th cent. Codex Venetus Marcianus gr. 122. Ap 1343 Codex Venetus Marcianus gr. 48. 14th cent. Codex Parisinus gr. 456.» — los seis códices de la Filocalia que sostienen el aparato, del siglo X al XV; la columna de siglas y fechas que corre al lado sale entreverada del troceo y no se cita

«J. A. Cramer, Catenae Graecorum Patrum in Novem Testamentum, vol. 4, In Epistolam S. Pauli ad Romanos (Oxford, 1844). (Codex Monacensis, 12th cent.)» — el primero de los otros dos testigos que Behr registra para la Filocalia: la catena de Cramer sobre la epístola a los Romanos

«Words in text which should be elided. <> Words added to text and translation. [] Words supplied by the translator.» — las tres siglas que gobiernan la lectura del texto y de la traducción en este volumen: lo que debe elidirse, lo añadido al texto y a la traducción, y lo suplido por el traductor

«In preparing this volume, I quickly came to the conclusion that the primary issue at stake was not the matter of individual readings, for which there is general consensus amongst previous editors, but rather the presentation of the text.» — la conclusión de método que Behr declara para su edición: lo que estaba en juego no eran las lecturas individuales, donde hay consenso, sino la presentación del texto

«As explained in the Introduction, it cannot pretend to be a reconstruction of the lost original, based upon what we supposedly know about Origens teaching, but must be an edition of Rufinus' Latin translation, intact.» — y la consecuencia: no una reconstrucción del original perdido a partir de lo que se supone saber de la doctrina de Orígenes, sino una edición de la traducción latina de Rufino, intacta

«As such, I have relegated to the space between the text and the critical apparatus those passages from others which can reasonably be supposed to parallel the passage being translated by Rufinus, as supplementary witnesses, and have translated these passages, where they need translation, as differing from Rufinus own text, in the footnotes to the translation; but I have consigned to Appendix II all the other passages introduced, or rather interpolated, into the text by Koetschau.» — cómo la ejecuta: los paralelos razonables, entre el texto y el aparato, traducidos en las notas donde difieren de Rufino, y todo lo demás interpolado por Koetschau, al apéndice segundo

«It should always be borne in mind that while Rufinus certainly extends or elaborates the text in various ways, the editors of the Philocalia have also omitted some significant sections, concerning which there is also no real doubt about their authenticity.» — y la advertencia con doble filo que repite al cerrar: Rufino alarga o elabora el texto, y los editores de la Filocalia omitieron secciones significativas cuya autenticidad tampoco se discute

«Regarding the translation, I have attempted to provide as literal a translation as I was able, while still respecting the rules of English grammar. This has, no doubt, resulted in longer sentences, more numerous sub-clauses, and a greater use of the passive, than will please some.» — lo que Behr declara sobre su traducción: lo más literal que pudo dentro de la gramática inglesa, con frases más largas, más subordinadas y más pasivas de las que agradarán a algunos

«This has been done in the conviction that the mode of expression, conveying as it does patterns of thought, is just as important as what is being said.» — y la convicción con que lo justifica, que es la última frase de la introducción: el modo de expresión, que lleva consigo patrones de pensamiento, importa tanto como lo que se dice

«Amsterdamer Papyrus Inv. no. 194. K. A. Worp and K. Treu, Origenes De Principiis ΠῚ 1, 6-8 in einem Amsterdamer Papyrus, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigrafik, 350 (1979), 43-47. (3rd—4th cent.)» — y el segundo testigo, el papiro de Ámsterdam con un tramo del libro tercero, del siglo III o IV, que es el más antiguo del griego. El año entre paréntesis de la referencia dispara la guarda anticosido; releído en el crudo, el tramo es la entrada entera de la tabla

«I have also given a full rendering of the headings found in the manuscripts in Appendix 1. As an edition of Rufinus text, I have also, unlike other modern editions, placed the Latin text of Rufinus above the Greek text of Princ. 3.1 and» — las dos decisiones restantes: los encabezados de los manuscritos íntegros en el apéndice primero, y el latín de Rufino por encima del griego de la Filocalia. La frase remata en la plana siguiente

«Rufinus here, and at the end of the paragraph, is alluding to the opening sentence of Jerome' preface to his translation (undertaken ca. 379-81) of Origen’s Hom. Ezech.: ‘It is indeed a great thing that you are asking, my friend, that I make Origen a Latin and give to Roman ears the man who in the opinion of Didymus the Seer was the second teacher of the churches after the Apostle?» — Behr identifica en nota al colega innombrado: Rufino alude a la frase inicial del prefacio de Jerónimo a su traducción de las homilías sobre Ezequiel, donde Orígenes es llamado el segundo maestro de las iglesias después del Apóstol según Dídimo el Vidente

«It is difÏcult to identify these passages. Jerome (Ruf. 2.11) claims that Rufinus inserted a passage of scholia composed by Didymus into Princ. 1.1.8.» — y la nota con que acota la declaración de método de Rufino: es difícil identificar esos pasajes, y lo más que Jerónimo alcanza a imputarle es un escolio de Dídimo insertado en 1.1.8

«These opening lines have been preserved in Greek by Eusebius of Caesarea, C. Marc. 1.4.26, numbered by Koetschau as Fragment 1. Marcellus points to Plato, Gorgias 454e, for a parallel to the opening words.» — Behr anota la procedencia del arranque: las líneas iniciales se conservan en griego por Eusebio de Cesarea, y Marcelo señala un paralelo con el Gorgias de Platón

«Cf Jerome, Ep. 1242.1 (ed. Hilberg 3, 97.9), who claims that, at the beginning of the first book, Origen asserts: ‘Christ, the Son of God, was not begotten but made (Christum, filium dei, non natum esse, sed factum).» — y la nota que acompaña al segundo punto de la lista, donde Behr consigna el cargo de Jerónimo: que al principio del libro primero Orígenes afirmó que el Hijo de Dios no fue engendrado sino hecho

«However Origen also states emphatically that Christ is ‘eternally begotten’: cf. esp. Hom. Jer. 9.4; Princ. 1.2.2. See also the comments in the Introduction, sections 3 and 5, regarding Origen’s understanding of ‘creation.» — y el contrapeso que añade en la misma nota: Orígenes afirma enfáticamente en otros lugares que Cristo es eternamente engendrado

«And while he declares that he does not know whether the Holy Spirit is created or uncreated [utrum factus sit an infactus], he has later on given his own opinion that except God the Father alone there is nothing uncreated [infactum]; referring to Princ. 1.2.6.» — la nota al punto sobre el Espíritu Santo, con el segundo cargo de Jerónimo en latín: que declarando no saber si el Espíritu es hecho o no hecho, opinó después que fuera del Padre nada hay no hecho

«"These explanatory words come of course from Rufinus.» — la nota más breve de Behr en el prefacio, y una de las pocas veces que separa la mano del traductor: la glosa que traduce el término griego es de Rufino

«Perhaps The Preaching of Peter. The same quotation is given by Ignatius of Antioch (Smyrn. 3.2), without mentioning its source, Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 3.36.11) repeats these words from Ignatius, as does Jerome (Vir. Ill. 16), who elsewhere (Corm. Isa. 18.1) describes them as coming from the Gospel of the Hebrews. The closest canonical parallel would be Luke 24:39.» — la nota con que Behr sigue la cita del opúsculo: quizá la Predicación de Pedro, citada igual por Ignacio de Antioquía sin nombrar fuente, repetida por Eusebio y por Jerónimo, que en otro lugar la da como del Evangelio de los Hebreos

«Cf. Tertullian, Apol. 22.5. in Comm. Matt. 17.30, Origen says that our present ‘lowly body’ (Phil. 3:21) will, in the resurrection, be transformed into one like those of the angels, ethereal and brilliant light’ (αἰθέρια καὶ αὐγοειδὲς φῶς). See also Princ. 3.6.4-6 on the character of the ‘spiritual body’ mentioned by Paul. On the other hand, Origen is emphatic that only the Trinity is bodiless: Princ. 1.6.4; 2.2.2; 4.3.15.» — y la nota que fija la posición de Orígenes sobre los cuerpos: el cuerpo humilde de ahora será transformado en uno como los de los ángeles, y solo la Trinidad es incorpórea

«Origen almost certainly wrote γενητός (from γίγνομαι, to come into being or ‘to happen’) rather than γεννητός (from γεννάω, to be born), two words which could be used equivalently in certain circumstances but which did not become firmly distinguished until the controversies of the fourth century.» — la explicación que Behr le opone en nota, y que consigna como casi cierta: Orígenes escribió con toda probabilidad la palabra griega de venir a ser y no la de ser engendrado, dos términos que no se distinguieron con firmeza hasta las controversias del siglo IV

«The similarity between these passages of Jerome and Pamphilus/Rufinus is enough to establish that Origen did indeed conclude Princ. 1.8.4 this way, despite Jerome’s attempt to suggest otherwise.» — y lo que Behr fija desde ese cotejo: la semejanza basta para tener por cierto que Orígenes cerró así el capítulo, pese al intento de Jerónimo de sugerir otra cosa

«Origen consistently rejects the idea of metempsychosis or rather metensomatosis: see Comm. Jo. 6.66-71, 86 (which contrasts μετενσωμάτωσις with ἐνσωμάτωσις);» — y la nota con que Behr acompaña ese rechazo: Orígenes rechaza de manera consistente la metempsicosis, o más bien la metensomatosis, y contrapone en griego los dos términos

«These, in our mind, are not dogmas, but as inquiries and conjectures, so that they might not seem to be completely untouched” (Haec inquit iuxta nostram sententiam non sint dogmata sed quaesita tantum atque proiecta, ne penitus intractata uiderentur)?» — Behr coteja en nota la versión de Jerónimo del cierre de ese capítulo, en latín: lo dicho no son dogmas sino cuestiones y conjeturas, para que no pareciera que quedaban del todo sin tocar

«This version of the conclusion of this chapter is similar to Rufinus other rendering, in his translation of Pamphilus Apology (175): ‘But these things, insofar as they concern us, are not dogmas, but have been said for the sake of discussion and are rejected. They have only been said lest it seem that a question that had been raised has gone unanswered' (Sed haec quantum ad nos pertinet non sint dogmata sed discussionis gratia dicta sint et abiciantur. Pro eo autem solo dicta sunt ne uideatur quaestio mota non esse discussa).» — y la otra versión que pone al lado, la que Rufino da al traducir la Apología de Pánfilo, también en latín: no son dogmas sino dichos por vía de discusión y rechazados

«Patrologia Orientalis Popular Patristic Series Patristiche Texte und Studien Recherches Augustiniennes et Patristiques Revue Biblique Recherches de Science Religieuse Society of Biblical Literature Sources chrétiennes Studia Patristica Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta Saint Vladimirs Orthodox Theological Quarterly Texte und Untersuchungen Zeitschrift fiir die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der» — la cola de la tabla de abreviaturas del volumen, que declara las colecciones y revistas con que Behr cita: de la Patrologia Orientalis a los Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta y las revistas patrísticas alemanas y francesas

Mónada (el glifo que condensa el esquema entero) — El capítulo sobre Dios cierra definiéndolo como un ser intelectual simple que no admite añadido alguno, y lo nombra con dos términos griegos que el texto conserva: unidad y, si cabe decirlo, unicidad, intelecto y fuente de la que todo ser intelectual toma su principio.

Gnosis (conocimiento salvífico) — La obra hace del conocimiento la vía: el sentido divino del corazón puro, no el de los ojos, es el que ve a Dios, y Behr encuentra en Clemente de Alejandría al cristiano perfeccionado, el gnóstico, para quien el futuro es ya presente por amor y que, asimilado a Dios, se crea y se fabrica a sí mismo.

Secreto (lo que se jura no fijar por escrito) — La distinción que gobierna todo el libro es que los apóstoles entregaron con suma claridad ciertos puntos y sobre otros solo afirmaron que las cosas son así, callando el cómo y el de dónde, para que los sucesores más diligentes tuvieran un ejercicio en que mostrar el fruto de su capacidad.

Cadena de transmisión (quién tomó de quién) — El criterio de verdad que la obra fija es la predicación eclesiástica transmitida desde los apóstoles por el orden de sucesión y permanente en las iglesias hasta el presente; solo ha de creerse verdad lo que en nada difiere de la tradición eclesiástica y apostólica.

Anima mundi (alma del mundo) — El mundo entero se describe como un animal inmenso y enorme sostenido por el Poder y la Razón de Dios como por una sola alma, y un solo poder abarca toda su diversidad para que obra tan grande no se disuelva por las disensiones de las almas.

Daimon (entidad intermedia, ni ángel ni demonio) — Al discutir el término incorpóreo, la obra distingue el cuerpo demoníaco, fino y tenue como el aire y por eso llamado incorpóreo por muchos, del cuerpo denso y palpable, y niega que el opúsculo donde el Salvador se dice no ser un demonio incorpóreo esté entre los libros eclesiásticos.

Imaginación (phantasia) — Al hablar del otro mundo que el Salvador indica, la obra rechaza expresamente hablar de un mundo incorpóreo que exista solo en la imaginación o en el reino inestable de los pensamientos, y con ello las imágenes que los griegos llaman ideas.

Crítica de fuentes (criterios de inclusión y descarte) — La atribución del texto es el dato de esta edición: Rufino declara en su prefacio qué omitió y qué amplió, y Behr dedica la parte más larga de su introducción a mostrar cómo Koetschau quebró esa traducción para interpolar en ella pasajes de los adversarios de Orígenes y de los anatemas de 553.