Ἅγιος ὁ Θεός, Ἅγιος ἰσχυρός, Ἅγιος ἀθάνατος, ἐλέησον ἡμᾶςKatholikon

Library › Origen › On Prayer

On Prayer

Origen, tr. Oulton, 1954

“Hallowed be thy name.” He who prays these words either shows that the object of his …

HALLOWED BE THY NAME
(Chapter XXIV)

1 “Hallowed be thy name.”2 He who prays these words either shows that the object of his prayer has not been achieved, or else having attained it he asks that a result not permanent should be maintained.3 This is evident enough from the passage here, in which according to Matthew and Luke we are commanded to say, “Hallowed be thy name,”2 as if the name of the Father were not yet hallowed. How, someone might say, can a man ask that the name of God be hallowed, as if it had not been hallowed? What is “the name” of the Father, and what is its hallowing? Let us consider these questions.

A “name,” then, is a compendious appellation manifesting the individual quality of the being named. For example, Paul the apostle has a certain individual quality: a quality of soul, which makes it of a certain kind; a quality of mind, which makes him capable of contemplating certain kinds of things; a quality of body, which makes it of a certain kind. The individuality of these qualities, which is incommunicable to another (for no being is exactly similar to Paul), is indicated by the name “Paul.” But in the case of men, since their individual qualities, as it were, alter, their names also according to Scripture alter suitably; when the quality of Abram changed, he was called Abraham4; and when Simon’s, he was named Peter5; and when Saul’s, the persecutor of Jesus, he was called Paul.6 In the case of God, however, who is in himself unchangeable, and remaining always unalterable, there is always one name, by which, as it were, he is called, the “I am”7 spoken of in Exodus,8 or something of similar import. Since, then, we all have some conception of God, and form some notions of whatever kind about him, but not all conceive what he is (for these are few, and, if I may say so, fewer than these few are those who comprehend his holiness in all things), we are rightly taught that the idea within us of God is holy, in order that we may see the holiness of him as he creates, foresees, judges, chooses, forsakes, receives, turns away from, deems worthy of honour, punishes each one according to his deserts.

In these and in similar expressions, if I may say so, the individual quality of God is characterized—what in my opinion is called the “name of God” in the Scriptures: in Exodus, “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain”9; in Deuteronomy, “Let my speech be waited for as the shower; let my words descend as the dew, as the rain upon the young grass10 and as the copious rain11 upon the herb12: for I called upon the name of the Lord”13; in Psalms, “They shall remember thy name in all generations.”14 He who connects the idea of God with things that are not fitting “takes the name of the Lord God in vain,” and he who is able to utter speech as the rain, which works together with them that hear for the fruitfulness of their souls, addressing words full of encouragement like dew, and by the power of edification bringing upon the hearers a most profitable shower of words or a most effectual and copious rain, can do these things because of the “name.” Therefore,15 when a man perceives16 his need of God the perfecter, he calls by himself upon him who is truly the supplier of the above-mentioned blessings; and everyone who clearly sees also the things of God remembers rather than learns them,17 even though he may seem to hear them from some one or may think that he discovers the mysteries of godliness.

Even as he who prays ought to note what has been said here and ask that “the name” of God “be hallowed,” so also it is said in Psalms, “Let us exalt his name together,”18 the prophet19 commanding us in full accord with the same mind and the same opinion to haste unto the true and lofty knowledge of the distinctive being of God. For this is to “exalt the name” of God “together,” when a man partaking of an effluence of deity20 “exalts”21 that very power of God of which he has partaken inasmuch as he has been raised up by God and has conquered his foes, who are unable to exult over his fall. This is indicated in the twenty-ninth psalm by the words: “I will exalt thee, O Lord, because thou didst raise me up, and not make my foes to rejoice over me.”22 And a man “exalts” God when he has dedicated for him a house within himself, as the title of the psalm has it: “A Psalm: A Song at the Dedication of the House”; A Psalm of “David.”23

Further, with regard to “Hallowed be thy name” and the words in the imperative mood that follow, it is to be said that the translators24 also frequently use the imperative instead of the optative mood, as for example in the Psalms: “Let the deceitful lips be dumb, which speak iniquity against the righteous man,”25 instead of “may they be”; and “Let the extortioner seek out all that he hath, Let him have no helper,”26 in the one hundred and eighth, concerning Judas. For the whole psalm is a request concerning Judas, that this and that may happen to him. But Tatian,27 failing to understand that “let there be” does not always indicate the optative, but sometimes the imperative, formed a most impious conception concerning him who said, “Let there be light,”28 even God, as if he were praying rather than commanding that there should be light: “since,” as he expresses his godless thought, “God was in darkness.”29 To him we must say, how will he take the words: “Let the earth bring forth grass for pasture,”30 and “Let the water under the heaven be gathered together,”31 and “Let the waters bring forth creeping things, creatures that have life,”32 and “Let the earth bring forth a living creature”33? Does God really pray that “the water under the heaven” should “be gathered together into one meeting place” in order that he may stand upon a firm foundation? Or, does he pray “Let the earth bring forth” in order that he may partake of the things that are brought forth from the earth? What need has he similar to the need for light on the part of creatures in the water and winged creatures or creatures on dry land, that he should also pray concerning these? But if, according to this author, it would be absurd to pray concerning these—the language used being in the imperative—may not a like thing be said about the saying “Let there be light,”34 since it is not in the optative but in the imperative? I have thought it necessary, since the prayer is expressed in the imperative, to call to mind his various interpretations for the sake of those who have been deceived into accepting his impious teaching. Once upon a time we ourselves came in contact with these persons.

Notes

  1. XXIV, 1. The general meaning of the opening sentence is not in doubt, but how best to emend the text of T is uncertain. I have added the words “He who prays,” as suggested by the Anonymous, and read “either . . . or” with Bentley instead of “some times . . . at other times.”
  2. Matt. 6:9; Luke 11:2.
  3. The text of this passage is uncertain, see note.
  4. Gen. 17:5.
  5. John 1:42; cf. Mark 3:16.
  6. Acts 9:4, 5; 13:9.
  7. XXIV, 2. the I am] T has ὦν, which has been emended to ὁ ὦν in accordance with the LXX of Ex. 3:14.
  8. Ex. 3:14.
  9. Ex. 20:7.
  10. XXIV, 3. young grass] Greek ἄγρωστις, lit. “dog’s-tooth grass.”
  11. XXIV, 3. copious rain] Greek νιφετός, “snowstorm,” which seems quite unsuitable, unless the word is used simply for “rain,” for which there is some authority in Nonnus. I have accordingly translated it “copious rain,” since the Hebrew word (pl.), of which νιφετός is the translation, is derived from a root meaning “much or many,” and is interpreted as “copious showers” by Brown, Driver, and Briggs.
  12. See note.
  13. Deut. 32:2, 3.
  14. Ps. 45:17.
  15. See note.
  16. XXIV, 3. Therefore, when a man perceives] I read διὰ τοῦτο for ταῦτα, as suggested by the Anonymous scholar.
  17. XXIV, 3. remembers rather than learns them] This is perhaps the only passage in Origen’s works where he hints at the Platonic doctrine of Anamnesis, namely, that “learning is nothing but reminiscence” (Phaedo, 72E; cf. Meno, 81D). If Origen lays little emphasis upon this doctrine, Clement of Alexandria expressly denies it in Ecl. Proph., 17 (C.B., XVII, 141): “God made us not pre-existing. For if we had pre-existed, we should also of necessity know whence we are, and how and for what purpose we have come hither.”
  18. Ps. 34:3.
  19. So Koetschau emends: cf. Acts 2:30, and also IX, 2, above.
  20. XXIV, 4. partaking of an effluence of deity] Cf. IX, 2; XXIII, 5; XXIV, 4; and XIX, 3 (note).
  21. Ps. 34:3.
  22. Ps. 30:1.
  23. Ps. 30 (title).
  24. XXIV, 5. the translators] i.e., the Septuagint.
  25. Ps. 31:18.
  26. Ps. 109:11, 12.
  27. XXIV, 5. Tatian] An Assyrian by birth, a disciple of Justin Martyr, who having been converted to Christianity composed c. 165 an Oratio ad Graecos, in which he ridiculed polytheism and Greek philosophy. His Diatessaron or Harmony of the Four Gospels dates from c. 170. Returning to the East after many travels, he founded the school and sect of the Encratites, whose tenets included a rejection of the use of wine and flesh and matrimony. They celebrated the Eucharist in water only, hence they were called Aquarii. The date of his death is uncertain.
    Origen (contra Celsum, I, 16) refers to the “very great learning” that Tatian displayed in his Oratio ad Graecos, and there is another reference, though not by name, to this treatise in contra Celsum, IV, 67. But in contra Celsum, VI, 51, the idea that “Let there be light” is to be taken as if it were a wish and in the optative mood, is associated with a “pestilent heresy,” although Tatian is not mentioned, as he is here, in the same connection. Tatian is also mentioned with disapprobation for this interpretation of Gen. 1:3 by Clement of Alexandria in the Ecl. Proph., 38:1 (C.B., XVII, 148).
  28. Gen. 1:3.
  29. XXIV, 5. his godless thought, “God was in darkness”] We are not told why Tatian held this idea. It may be, however, that believing, with other gnostics, that the supreme God was inscrutable he interpreted the creation story in such a way as to assign the creation of light (whereby God was revealed) to a subordinate aeon. God, therefore, expressed a wish “Let there be light,” and until his wish was carried out by another he himself “was in darkness.”
  30. Gen. 1:11.
  31. Gen. 1:9.
  32. Gen. 1:20.
  33. Gen. 1:24.
  34. Gen. 1:3.

· Contents ·