He May Praise Origen, but No One Else May

But perhaps you will say to me, “Why do you fill your paper with this needless material? Does even my friend say that it is a crime to name Origen, or to praise him for his talents? If Origen is proclaimed as ‘so great a man, and such a one,’ that only makes us more eager to be told whether in other passages he is called ‘an apostolic man,’ or ‘a teacher of the churches,’ or anything of the kind that seems to commend not only his talents but his faith.” Very well, this shall be done. It was for this very purpose that I brought forward the passage where he calls him “so great a man, and such a one.” For, unless I am mistaken, it is in the preface where he uses this phrase of praise that he also claims for Origen the right to be called an apostle or a prophet, and to be praised to the very heavens. In the same way, if there are passages where I happen to have praised Origen’s learning, all my praise is of just this kind. This man stirs up all this alarm in you over expressions like these of mine; but he insists that it is unjust to bring up similar expressions against him when they occur in his own writings. He does not choose to stand on equal terms with us before the court of opinion. He condemns us on mere suspicion, while he does not hold himself bound even by his own handwriting. He does not think it necessary, in a matter like this, to keep the rule of holy Scripture, which demands that every man be judged without favoritism. Since that is so, I will answer for myself, not as justice demands, but as he wishes. He says to me: “If you have translated Origen, you are to be blamed. But I, even if I have said the very things for which I blame him, have done well, and my words ought to be read and held as true. If you have praised his talents or his knowledge, you have committed a crime. If I have praised his talents, it counts for nothing.” [a]