Origen on Oaths

Origen on Oaths

---

De Principiis Book 4, Chapter 19

Written c. 230 CE. Greek no longer extant, from Rufinus' latin translation, though this excerpt also exists in the Philocalia.

Source: ANF04:368

And with respect to the precepts enjoined in the Gospels, no doubt can be entertained that very many of these are to be literally observed, as, e.g., when our Lord says, But I say unto you, Swear not at all.

---

Exhortation To Martyrdom, Chapter 7

Written c. 235 CE.

Source: Origen. 1979. Origen, p. 45-46. Translated by Rowan A. Greer. Paulist Press.

We must remember the One who taught, "But I say to you, Do not swear at all.” For if the person who swears by heaven transgresses against the throne of God, and if the one who swears by earth commits sacrilege by making what is called "the stool of God's feet" a god (cf. Is. 66:1; Mt. 5:35), and if the one who swears by Jerusalem sins though it is the city of a great king, and if the one who swears by his own head offends—how great a sin must we suppose it is to swear by someone's Fortune? We must then remember the saying, "For every careless word you will render account on the day of judgment" (Mt. 12:36). For what other word is as careless as the oath in denial?

---

Homily 5.12 on Jeremiah, 4:1-2

Written c. 240 CE.

Source: Origen. Fathers of the Church, Volume 97: Homilies on Jeremiah and 1 Kings 28, p. 53-54. Translated by John C. Smith. Baltimore, MD, USA: Catholic University of America Press, 2010.

If he removes his abominations from his mouth, and he is awed by my presence, and he swears, “May the Lord live in truth and in judgment and in righteousness.” Let us, those who swear, see for ourselves in what way we do not swear in judgment but without judgment, so that our oaths arise by habit more than by judgment. In fact we are carried away and when he reproves this the Word says: And if he swears: “May the Lord live in truth and in judgment and in righteousness.” We know what is said to the disciples in the Gospel by the Lord: But I say to you: do not swear at all, but let us also consider that word, and if God will permit, both views will be examined. For perhaps first it is necessary to swear in truth and in judgment and in righteousness so that after this, after having progressed, a worthy person may come not to swear at all, but to have a yes which needs no witnesses to be this, to have a “no” which needs no witnesses for it to be truly no.

And he swears, then, “May the Lord live in truth.” First, in the swearing, let not the false but the true live, so he may swear with truth— for we wretches also give false oaths. But suppose it is with truth, the oath is still not proper, but in judgment. For it may happen that I swear from habit, I do not swear in judgment. If one would need to take for some oath the witness of the God of the universe and his Christ with respect to some matter, how great must be the matter to get down on one’s knees and swear? To cure the unbelief which arises in some concerning my discourse I might at some point do this, but if it is a risk if I swear thus, I would sin. If, then, he swears, “May the Lord live with truth and in judgment,” not without judgment, and in righteousness, not with unrighteousness, and the nations will bless in him.

---

Origen’s Oath, in Homily 1.7 on the Song of Songs

Written c. 240 CE. Greek no longer extant. English translation based on Latin translation of Jerome, c. 383 CE. Origen uses an oath of the form "God is my witness" when recalling his mystical experiance.

Source: Lawson, Richard P., ed. The Song of Songs: Commentary and Homilies, p. 280. ACW No. 26. Paulist Press, 1957.

God is my witness that I have often perceived the Bridegroom drawing near me and being most intensely present with me; then suddenly He has withdrawn and I could not find Him, though I sought to do so.

---

Commentary on Matthew [Latin 17] on Mt. 23:20

Written c. 248 CE. 

Source: Origen. The Commentary of Origen on the Gospel of St Matthew. Translated by Ronald E. Heine, Oxford University Press, 2018.

One of the Pharisees traditions, therefore, was about such oath-taking, since some were swearing by the temple, but others by the gold of the temple; likewise some were swearing ‘by the altar’, and others by ’the gift on the altar;’ and they were saying that he is a debtor who has sworn 'by the gold of the temple' or 'by the gift on the altar; but he who has sworn 'by the temple' or 'by the altar' has no liability. On that account the Saviour, speaking to the Jews against traditions of that kind and wishing to turn them from human traditions to the divine commandments, says that they are 'blind and foolish' who hand on such traditions, not seeing that nothing placed in the temple is sanctified by itself, but by the temple. In the same way, what is placed 'on the altar’ is already judged to be a gift belonging to God because it has been received 'on' the altar. If, then, 'the temple' is the cause of the sanctification of the gold, and 'the altar' for the sanctification of the gift, how does it not appear foolish that this person who swears by the sanctifying object is not under obligation, but the one who has sworn by what has been sanctified is seen to be under obligation, as if what is sanctified is better than what sanctifies? Thus because the Jews also have the habit of swearing by heaven, he also adds this to the preceding words to reproach those who were more readily swearing 'by heaven' than by God, since he acts just as unreasonably 'who swears by heaven' as he 'who swears by the temple' or 'by the altar, because he who swears 'by heaven' also appears to swear 'by him who sits upon it, and he does not (as he thought) avoid danger because he does not swear by God himself, but 'by the throne of God: And he spoke these words to the Jews when he was prohibiting people from paying attention to the traditions of the Pharisees. Otherwise, above, he clearly forbid swearing at all.

---

Commentary on Matthew [Latin 110] on Mt. 26:63-64

Written c. 248 CE.

Source: Origen. The Commentary of Origen on the Gospel of St Matthew. Translated by Ronald E. Heine, Oxford University Press, 2018.

Indeed, we find the practice of adjuring several times in the Law. For example, in Numbers the Law says, ‘The priest shall adjure her’ (that is, that woman in whose husband there is a ‘spirit of jealousy’) ‘and he’ (that is, the priest) ‘shall say to the woman: If another man did not sleep with you, and if you have not transgressed so that you are defiled by a man who is not your husband, you will be unharmed by this water of reproach that has been cursed.’ It says a few lines later, ‘The priest shall adjure the woman with the adjurations of this curse’. Likewise, in the third book of the Kings, King Ahab says to Micaiah, ‘Now for the second time I adjure you to tell me the truth in the name of the Lord?’ Now a king adjures a prophet, and he does not adjure in the same way the priest does in Numbers, for the latter adjures on the basis of a precept of the Law, but the former adjures on the basis of his own will. In the present passage, a priest adjures Jesus ‘by the living God’. But I do not think it is necessary that a person who desires to live in accordance with the Gospel adjure another. For it is like what the Lord himself says in the Gospel, ‘But I say to you, Do not swear at all’ and do not adjure at all. For if it is not permitted to swear so far as it is contained in Christ's command in the Gospel, it is true that it is not permitted to adjure another. Therefore, the ‘chief priest’ unlawfully adjured Jesus, although he appeared to have adjured him ‘by the living God’.

Someone will ask if it is proper to adjure demons. The person who looks to the multitudes who have dared to do such things will say that this is not done for no reason; but the person who looks to Jesus *** who commands demons, but even when he gives authority to his disciples over all demons and the power to heal illnesses, will say that adjuring demons is not based on the authority given by the Saviour, for it is Jewish. This (although sometimes something similar occurs among us) is similar to the fact that demons used to be adjured by adjurations written by Solomon. But the people themselves who used to use those adjurations quite often did not use the properly appointed books for this, but adjured demons with formulas received from a Hebrew.

However, it did not seem appropriate that our Lord respond to the adjuration of the chief priest, as if, contrary to his own will, he experienced a power from the one adjuring him. For this reason, he neither denied that he was the Christ, the Son of God, nor did he admit it openly, but treating the one adjuring him as if he were a witness (since it was the priest who, in his interrogation, spoke the words, ‘Christ, the Son of God’) he says, ‘You said it’.

And because ‘everyone who commits sin has been born of the devil’ and the chief priest, who was baiting Jesus, also committed sin, and because he had been born of the devil, as it were, he was imitating his own father who twice dubiously asked the Saviour, ‘If you are the Son of God’, as it is written in the temptation narrative. For ‘If you are the Son of God’ and ‘If you are the Christ the Son of God’ are similar. For one can say correctly on this passage that doubting whether he is Son of God or whether he is the Christ is the work of the devil and of the chief priest who is questioning our Lord in a treacherous manner. Peter, however, ascertained nothing like this, for without any doubt he proclaimed, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God’. He did not preface his statement with ‘If’ He was pronounced ‘blessed’ because ‘flesh and blood’ had not revealed it to him, ‘but God the Father who is in heaven’. But those who say doubtfully, ‘If you are the Son of God’ are removed from all beatitude. For because that chief priest was not worthy of the doctrine of Christ, he does not teach him, nor does he say, ‘I am’. Instead, taking the expression of the priest's own mouth, he converts it to a refutation and says, ‘You said it’, so that, in this way he appears to be blamed, not taught.

---

Fragments on Matthew on Mt. 5:33-37

Reliability uncertain.

Source: Origen. The Commentary of Origen on the Gospel of St Matthew. Translated by Ronald E. Heine, Oxford University Press, 2018.

Fragment on Matthew 5:33 ‘You shall not take the name of the Lord in vain’ is the third commandment of the Decalogue. But investigate if it has been said anywhere as it is written here.

Fragment on Matthew 5:33-7 But let the testimony of our life be a greater guarantee than an oath. But if some shameless person who is not put to shame by your life should dare to apply an oath to you, let your yes be yes and your no be no in place of an oath.

Fragment on Matthew 5:37 For if someone swears truly on any random thing, he errs, but one who has not sworn would never swear falsely. And you will discover that an oath is the unchangeable ‘confirmation’ of each person, as in the saying, ‘I swore and I established it’, and ‘The Lord swore and will not change his mind’.

---

Commentary on Matthew on Mt. 5:33-37

Source: Panayiotis, Tzamalikos. "Origen: New Fragments from the Commentary on Matthew: Codices Sabaiticus 232 & Holy Cross 104, Jerusalem." (2020). [p. 73-75]

Ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις, οὐκ ἐπιορκήσεις. Τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐκ ἦλθεν ἐπὶ τὴν κλοπὴν εὐθέως, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τὴν ψευδοµαρτυρίαν, ὑπερβὰς ἐκείνην τὴν ἐντολήν; ῞Οτι ὁ µὲν κλέπτων ἔστιν ὅτε καὶ ὀµεῖται· ὁ δὲ µὴ ὀµνύναι µηδὲ ψεύδεσθαι εἰδὼς πολλῷ µᾶλλον οὐχ αἱρήσεται κλέπτειν. ῞Ωστε διὰ ταύτης κἀκείνην ἀνέτρεψε. Τὸ γὰρ ψεῦδος ἀπὸ τοῦ κλέπτειν.

Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑµῖν, µὴ ὀµόσαι ὅλως. Τὸ εὐορκεῖν ὁ παλαιὸς νόµος εἶχεν· ὁ δὲ Κύριος οὐδόλως ὀµνύειν βούλεται. ᾽Επειδὴ δὲ ᾽Ιουδαῖοι τοῦ Θεοῦ λέγοντος ἤκουον διὰ τοῦ προφήτου, ὁ οὐρανός µοι θρόνος ἡ δὲ γῆ ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν µου, ὅρκιον ἐποιοῦντο τὸν οὐρανόν, θεῖον αὐτὸν ὀνοµάζοντες θρόνον, ὁµοίως δὲ καὶ τὴν γῆν ὑπὸ πόδας Θεοῦ κειµένην, καὶ µετὰ τὴν ῾Ιερουσαλήµ. Πόλις γὰρ ἔφασκον ἐστὶ τοῦ πάντων κρατοῦντος Θεοῦ, καίτοι τῶν ἀρχαιοτέρων ἁγίων τὸ ζῇ Κύριος ἐν ὅρκου χρείᾳ πεποιηµένων.

Διὸ τὴν ἠλιθιωτάτην αὐτῶν ἔννοιαν κατὰ κιβδηλεύων ὁ σωτήρ, µὴ δεῖν ἀπόµνυσθαι λέγει, µήτε ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ ὅτι θρόνος ἐστὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ, µήτε ἐν τῆ γῇ ὅτι ὑποπόδιόν ἐστι τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ, µήτε εἰς ῾Ιεροσόλυµα ὅτι πόλις ἐστι τοῦ µεγάλου βασιλέως. ῝Α γὰρ ἐκεῖνοι ληροῦντες ἔφασκον, ταῦτα χρησίµως διεστέλλετο ὁ σωτήρ, πανταχοῦ ἐπίπλαστον καὶ οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅθεν ἐξευρηµένον, ἐλέγχων αὐτῶν τὸ ἐν τούτοις εὐλαβές. Οἰχέσθω δὴ οὖν καὶ ἡ ἐπὶ τόδε πλάνησις. 

Ὁ γὰρ κατὰ τῶν κτισµάτων ὀµνύων τὸν Θεὸν τὸν πληροῦντα αὐτὰ ὀµνύει. Οὐ δι᾽ ἑαυτὰ γὰρ τιµᾶται τὰ στοιχεῖα, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸν ποιήσαντα. Κωλύει δὲ καὶ ἄλλως κατ᾽ αὐτῶν ὀµνύειν, ἵνα µὴ δῷµεν τῇ κτίσει τὸ ὑπὲρ τὴν κτίσιν ἀξίωµα θεοποιοῦντες αὐτά. Θρόνος δὲ λέγεται Θεοῦ ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ὑποπόδιον ἡ γῆ, οὐχ ὅτι περιέχεται ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειδὴ ἐπαναπαύεται τερπόµενος τῇ δηµιουργίᾳ αὐτῶν.

᾽Απαγορεύει δὲ τὸν κατὰ τῆς ῾Ιερουσαλὴµ ὅρκον, ὅτι τύπος ἐστὶ τῆς ἄνω ῾Ιερουσαλήµ, τῆς τῶν πρωτοτόκων ἐκκλησίας. Οὔτε δὲ κατὰ τῆς κεφαλῆς ὀµνύειν κελεύει. Οὔτε γὰρ τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ κύριος ὁ ἄνθρωπος, ἑτέρου ὢν ποίηµα, ὃς οὐδὲ τρίχα ἑαυτοῦ µεταποιῆσαι δύναται. Οὐδὲ γὰρ ὡς εὐτελοῦς οὔσης αὐτῆς ὀµνύειν δεῖ κατ᾽ αὐτῆς· τιµία γάρ ἐστιν οὕτως, ὡς καὶ αἱ τρίχες αὐτῆς ἠρίθµηνται παρὰ Θεῷ, αἵτινες δοκοῦσιν εἶναι παρά τισι περιτταί.

Μόνος δὲ ὁ Θεὸς ὀµνύει καθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ, τουτέστι κατὰ τῆς ἰδίας δόξης, ὡς µόνος ἐλεύθερος. Διὸ ὡς ὑπερβαινούσης ἡµᾶς τῆς ὁµοιότητος, οὐκ ὀφείλοµεν καθ᾽ ἑαυτῶν ὀµνύειν, ἀλλὰ τὸ ναὶ καὶ τὸ οὒ ἀντὶ τοῦ ὅρκου κεχρῆσθαι. Διὰ γὰρ τὸ ἀξιόπιστον τῶν πιστῶν, τὸ ναὶ ἀντὶ τοῦ ὅρκου ἐστί· τὸ δὲ περισσὸν τούτων, τουτέστι τὸ ὅλως κατά τινος ὁµνύναι, διαβολικόν ἐστι. Διὰ δὲ τὰς τῶν παλαιῶν ἀσθενείας τοῦτο συνεχωρήθη, ὡς καὶ αἱ δι᾽ αἱµάτων θυσίαι καὶ ὅσα ὅµοια.

µήτε ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὅτι θρόνος. ᾽Επαίρει τὰ στοιχεῖα, οὐκ ἀπὸ τῆς οἰκείας φύσεως, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ περὶ αὐτὰ σχέσεως. ᾽Επειδὴ γὰρ πολλὴ ἡ τῆς εἰδωλολατρίας τυραννὶς ἦν, ἵνα µὴ δόξῃ τὰ στοιχεῖα δι᾽ ἑαυτὰ εἶναι τίµια, ταύτην τέθεικε τὴν αἰτίαν, ἥτις εἰς τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ δόξαν διέβαινεν. Οὐ γὰρ εἶπεν ἐπειδὴ καλὸς καὶ µέγας ὁ οὐρανός, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειδὴ τοῦ Θεοῦ ὁ µέν ἐστι θρόνος, ἡ δὲ ὑποπόδιον. ῾Υποπόδιον δέ φησι τὴν γῆν, ὅτι ὑπὸ τὴν ἐξουσίαν εἰ καὶ µὴ τῆς ἁγιότητος αὐτοῦ δεκτικὴ νῦν διὰ τὰς ἁµαρτίας.

Τὰ δὲ ῾Ιεροσόλυµα πόλιν τοῦ µεγάλου βασιλέως, πρὸς τὴν ὑπόληψιν τῶν ᾽Ιουδαίων φησι. ῎Ετι δὲ καὶ διὰ τοῦτο κωλύει κατὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς ὀµνύειν, ἵνα µὴ δῶµεν τῇ κτίσει τὸ ὑπὲρ τὴν κτίσιν ἀξίωµα θεοποιοῦντες αὐτήν. 

Οἱ γὰρ ὀµνύοντες, φησὶ ὁ ἀπόστολος, κατὰ τοῦ µείζονος ὀµνύουσιν, τὸ δὲ περισσὸν τοῦ ναὶ καὶ τοῦ οὔ, ὁ ὅρκος ἐστίν, οὐ τὸ ἐπιορκεῖν. ᾽Εκεῖνο γὰρ οὐδεὶς δεῖται µαθεῖν ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ ἐστι. Διὰ τοῦτο δὲ τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ ὅρκος νενοµοθέτητο, ἵνα µὴ κατὰ τῶν εἰδώλων ὀµνύωσι. Καὶ ὁ εἰς τὴν κεφαλὴν δὲ αὐτοῦ ὀµνὺς τὸν αὐτῆς δηµιουργὸν διασύρει ὡς εὐτελῶν ποιητήν.

ἔστω δὲ ὁ λόγος ὑµῶν. Εὐορκῶν µὲν γάρ τις τυχόν παρασφάλλεται, µὴ ὀµνὺς δὲ οὐκ ἄν τις ποτὲ ἐπιορκήσειεν. ῞Ορκον δὲ εὑρήσεις τὴν ἀµετάθετον ἑκάστου βεβαίωσιν, ὡς ἐν τῷ ὤµοσα καὶ ἔστησα καὶ ὤµοσε Κύριος καὶ οὐ µεταµεληθήσεται.

῎Εστω ἡ τοῦ βίου ὑµῶν µαρτυρία βεβαιοτέρα ὅρκου. Εἰ δέ τις ἀναιδὴς µὴ δυσωπούµενος ὑµῶν τῷ βίῳ τολµᾷ ὑµῖν ἐπαγαγεῖν ὅρκον, ἔστω ὑµῶν τὸ ναὶ ναί, καὶ τὸ οὒ οὒ ἀντὶ ὅρκου.