These two homilies were preached at Caesarea, around 242 according to Nautin or about ten years earlier by a different chronology. In them Origen deals with Luke’s story of Christ’s childhood. Origen found problematical the implication that Jesus shared the limitations of human children in Luke’s testimony that Christ “progressed,” not just “in age,” but also “in wisdom” and “in grace with God and men” (Lk. 2:53). To explain how the incarnate Word could actually grow, he appeals to Christ’s self-emptying in the so-called “kenosis hymn” of Philippians 2. In his condescension to humanity, the Logos deliberately puts his wisdom and power aside, gradually and partially taking them back up as he matures physically. In the nineteenth homily the child Jesus, like Origen himself as depicted in the Address, teaches Socratically, asking questions rather than lecturing. The twentieth includes a fascinating, if double-edged, discussion of the obedience due to ecclesiastical authority and an application of the principle of homonymy, in this case to physical and spiritual maturity.
The translation is from Origène, Homélies sur S. Luc, ed. Henri Crouzel, François Fournier, and Pierre Périchon = SC 87, Paris, Cerf, 1962, pp. 272–86.
Text
Homily 19
Because some, who appear to believe the Holy Scriptures, deny the divinity of the Savior, alleging as a pretext the glory of Almighty God, it seems right to me to teach them, by the authority of the same Scriptures, that something divine has entered a human body, and not just a human body, but also a human soul. However, if we carefully examine the sense of the Scriptures, we note that his soul had a property not shared by other souls; every human soul, before attaining virtue, is defiled by vices, but Jesus’ soul was never soiled by sin’s filth. Even so, before he was 12 years old, the Holy Spirit says of him in Luke’s gospel: “The boy indeed grew, became strong and was filled with wisdom” (Lk. 2:40). It is not a property of human nature to be filled with wisdom at 12 years of age. Having a share of wisdom is one thing, but being filled with wisdom is another. 2 There is therefore no doubt that something divine appeared in Jesus’ flesh, something exceeding not only human nature, but the nature of any rational creature.
And it says “he grew.” For he humbled himself, taking the form of a servant, and by the same power by which he humbled himself, he grew. He appeared weak, when he assumed a weak human body, and on its account he became strong. The Son of God emptied himself (Phil. 2:7) and on this account he was again filled with wisdom. “And God’s grace was with him” (Lk. 2:40). It was not when he reached adolescence or when he taught openly, but when he was a child that he had God’s grace, and because everything about him is marvelous, his childhood also was marvelous, as he was filled with God’s wisdom.
“His parents then went to Jerusalem, according to their custom, to the feast day of the Passover. And he was twelve years old” (Lk. 2:42). Observe carefully that, before he was 12 years old, he was filled with the wisdom of God and the other things that are written concerning him were fulfilled. When therefore, as I have said, he was 12 years old, the feast concluded and his parents were returning, but “the child stayed in Jerusalem without the knowledge of his parents” (Lk. 2:43). Understand that here there is something that surpasses human nature. It was not just a matter of his staying while his parents did not know where he was. I think here that the child stayed in Jerusalem and his parents did not know where he stayed in a similar manner to the incident in John’s gospel when the Jews laid an ambush for him and he escaped out of their midst and disappeared (see Jn 8:59 and 10:39). Do not be shocked that they are called parents, because they deserved to be called mother and father, the one by giving birth to him, the other by caring for him.
It continues: “We have searched for you sorrowing” (Lk. 2:48). I do not think that they were sorrowing because they thought that the child was lost or dead. It is impossible that Mary, who knew that she had conceived by the Holy Spirit by the testimony of the angel’s speaking, the shepherds’ hastening to the stable and Simeon’s prophesying, should fear that the child was missing because he was lost. Reject that opinion altogether when it comes to Joseph, who had been instructed by an angel to take the child and flee to Egypt (Mt. 2:13) and who had heard the words: “Do not fear to take Mary as your wife, because that which is born in her is from the Holy Spirit” (Mt. 1:20). They could not have feared that the child was lost when they knew him to be divine. The text hints at a different sorrow and searching than what the simple reader would understand.
Just as, when you read the Scriptures, you search for the meaning with sorrow and anguish, not because you think that the Scriptures are in error or contain anything absurd, but because you cannot find the true word and intention that they must contain, so they searched for Jesus, anxious that he might have departed from them, either because he had departed to go to another place or – as I suppose is more likely – because he had returned to heaven so that he might descend again at an appropriate time. Therefore they searched for the Son of God sorrowing. And when they found him, they did not find him among their relatives, for the Son of God can admit no human relation. They did not find him among their acquaintances (Lk. 2:44), for the great divine power was beyond human acquaintance and knowledge. Where, then, did they find him? They found the Son of God in the temple (Lk. 2:46). When you yourself are searching for the Son of God, search first in the temple, go there, where you will find Christ, the Word and Wisdom, that is, the Son of God.
Because he was really a little child, they found him in the midst of the teachers sanctifying and instructing them. Because he was a little child, they found him in the midst of them, not teaching them, but asking them questions (Lk. 2:46), and that on account of the appropriate behavior for his age, so that he may teach us what is appropriate for a child, even those who are wise and learned, and that they would do better to listen to their teachers, when they wish to teach them, than to engage in vain ostentation. He asked the teachers questions, I say, not to learn something, but to instruct them by asking questions. Asking questions and answering wisely flow from the same source of teaching, and it belongs to the same knowledge to know what questions to ask and how to answer. It was necessary for the Savior as a teacher to instruct us initially in what questions to ask, so that later we might answer the questions according to the word and reason of God to whom be glory and power for ever and ever. Amen (1 Pet. 4:11).
Homily 20
Mary and Joseph were searching for Jesus among those close and did not find him; they were searching for him among companions and could not find him. They searched for him in the temple and not simply in the temple, not simply among the teachers, but in the midst of the teachers instructing (Lk. 2:46). There they found him. Wherever there are teachers, there Jesus is found in the midst of the teachers, provided that the teacher sits in the temple and never leaves it.
Jesus profited his teachers and those who saw him asking questions; he taught them speaking in their midst, and somehow stimulating them to search for what they did not know and to investigate things that, until then, they could not know whether they understood or not.
Therefore Jesus is found in the midst of the teachers and, when he is found, he says to those who had been searching for him: “Why were you searching for me? Did you not know that I must be in my father’s [place]?” (Lk. 2:49). Initially, understanding this passage simply, let us arm ourselves against the irreverent heretics, who say that the Creator and the God of the law and the prophets is not Christ’s father. See, here the God of the temple is declared to be Christ’s father. Let the Valentinians blush when they hear Jesus saying: “I must be in my father’s [place].” Let all the heretics blush, who accept the Gospel according to Luke and despise what is written in it. This, as I have said, is the simpler sense.
But when, in fact, it added “they did not understand what he said,” let us diligently uncover the meaning of the text. Were they so dull and stupid that they did not understand what he said, because what he said “I must be in my father’s [place]” meant “in the temple”? Or did it mean something more profound, which would better edify its hearers, namely that each of us, if he is good and perfect, belongs to God? Generally speaking, therefore, the Savior teaches each of us that he abides only in those who belong to God the Father. If any of you belong to God the Father, he has Jesus in his midst. Let us then believe in what he said: “I must be in my father’s [place].” And I think that we have a temple that is more rational, alive, and true than the one that was built as a symbol by worldly manufacture. Just as Jesus’ presence in the temple has a figurative meaning, so does his departure. For he left the earthly temple (Mt. 24:1) saying, “See, your house is left to you deserted” (Mt. 23:38), and leaving that temple came to the dominion of God the Father, that is, the churches spread out over the whole world, and said: “I must be in my father’s [place].” Therefore they did not then understand the word that was spoken to them.
At the same time attend to this: as long as he stayed in his Father’s dominion, he was above, and because Mary and Joseph did not yet have full faith, they could not reside above with him, so he is said to have descended with them (Lk. 2:51). Often Jesus descended with his disciples, nor did he always go about on the mountain or stay endlessly on the summit. Further, because those who suffer under various infirmities do not have the strength to climb the mountain, he therefore descended and came (see Mt. 8:1) to those who were below. Therefore it is written: “he descended with them and went to Nazareth and was subject to them” (Lk. 2:51).
Learn, children, to be subject to our parents. The greater was subject to the lesser. Because he recognized Joseph’s seniority, Jesus paid him the honor due to parents, giving all children an example to be subject to their fathers and, if they have no fathers, to be subject to those who have a father’s position. Why should I speak of parents and children? If Jesus the Son of God was subject to Joseph and Mary, shall I not be subject to the bishop, who has been made a father to me by God? Shall I not be subject to the presbyter set over me by the Lord’s choice? I suppose that Joseph knew that Jesus, who was subject to him, was greater than he, and knowing the one subject to be greater, he reverently moderated his authority. Let anyone see that often an inferior person is placed in authority over better persons, so that he who is subject is better than he who seems to be placed in authority. When he who is higher in rank understands this, he is not puffed up with pride because of his higher rank, but knows that someone subject to him may be his better, as Jesus was subject to Joseph.
Then follows: “But Mary kept all these words in her heart” (Lk. 2:51). She suspected something more than human, so she kept all these words in her heart, not as if they were those of a 12-year-old child, but as those of him who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, whom she saw progress in wisdom and in grace with God and men (Lk. 2:52). Jesus progressed in wisdom and year by year appeared more wise. Was he not wise to begin with, if he progressed in wisdom? But because he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant (Phil. 2:7), he recovered that which he had lost. Did he regain and fill himself again with powers, which earlier he seemed to have left behind when he assumed a body? He progressed, therefore, not in wisdom, but in age. For there is a progress in age. Scripture speaks of two ages: one of the body, which is not within our power but in that of natural law; the other of soul, which is actually in our power, in which, if we wish, we can grow daily
and arrive at perfection, so that we may no longer be little children, tossed and borne about with every wind of doctrine (Eph. 4:14), but, ceasing to be little children, we begin to be men and say “when I became a man, I destroyed those things which belonged to a child” (1 Cor. 13:11). As I have said, progress in this age, which involves growth in soul, is in our power. If this testimony is not enough, we can take another example from Paul: “Until we all come,” he says, “to the perfect man, to the measure of the age of the fullness of the body of Christ” (Eph. 4:13). It is therefore in our power to come to the measure of the age of the fullness of the body of Christ, and, if it is in our power, let us struggle to put away the little child and destroy it and arrive at the other ages, so that we may also hear these words: “You have gone in peace to your fathers, having been brought up to a good old age” (Gen. 15:15), a spiritual one that is, which is truly a good old age, a white old age which arrives at its end in Jesus Christ to whom be glory and power for ever and ever. Amen (1 Pet. 4:11).
