F. prat, origene

On Tuesday's episode of her podcast, "Busy Philipps Is Doing Her Best ," Philipps slammed the actor for the post, which she described as "bulls", saying it came off like he was "patronizing" his wife. The actress first noted that she was friends with Pratt "years ago," sharing that she went on vacation with Pratt and Faris when the latter was pregnant with Jack. Either like you're the dumbest mothefer on Earth, or you're a real righteous asshole.

When her co-host Caissie St. Onge asked if Pratt wasn't "a smart person when [they] hung out before," Philipps said, "Real talk. I don't know. He drank a lot," but added that Pratt was "super nice" and "funny. Origene dunque vuoi dare una traccia, un metodo per risolvere un determinato tipo di problemi 1.

Il Rist pp. RA Rufino equipara cpvaig qpavTaoTixf a cpavxaaia: infatti usa o gli stessi termini texendi Anche nel paragrafo successivo vediamo che Rufino con naturales m o t u s traduce tanto tfj qpavTaoxixfj qpvaei O R 50 quanto rag cpaviaoiag O 36 R Bisogna ricordare che Rufino, in princ. II 8, 1, r. Che questo passo sia add. Grilli, Studi paneziani, « Studi italiani di filologia classica », 29, , pp.

Come fa ben rilevare il Grilli art. Pertanto con bonos vel contrarios motus R 71 che rende cpav- Taaiav Nella traduzione latina del princ. Lampe, p. R 64 e sostenuti da diverse scuole di pensiero. IV 74 ss. Pohlenz I, e IV 84 SC , p. IV e soprattutto IV IV 85 e la relativa nota del Borret SC , pp. IV 86 SC , p. Si veda, ad es. Simo- netti, n.

Pohlenz II, 58, n. Oppure bisogna pensare che beate abbia qui il significato di sancte? Ma occorre non limitarsi alla sola cultura filosofica. I santi sono necessariamente beati. Mentre Origene, a conclusione del lungo esame di Exod. IV 4, 5, r. Vediamo come Rufino lo rende. Consideriamo ora dettagliatamente la traduzione di Rufino di O Ma mentre in Origene il concetto appare qui quattro volte, in Rufino una volta sola.

Rufino ha ritenuto dunque sufficiente la traduzione di questo passo quomodo Ma in Origene la ripresa ha una sua precisa funzione, in quanto viene dopo l'esempio preso dal NT e dunque dopo la prova, il sostegno concreto all'accusa contro gli awersari. O reso da Rufino con ut per haec A Rufino, estraneo e disinteressato alla polemica an- tignostica, la ripresa sembra superflua e priva di interesse 4.

OA RA 'Erte! La contrapposizione tra la posizione dei marcioniti e quella degli ortodossi cpaai,. Soppressione di riferimenti agli eretici Anche in B, laddove Origene si riferisce agli eretici del suo tempo, troviamo talora in Rufino delle omissioni. Si perde cosi il riferimento ai libri che gli gnostici ritenevano chiave di conoscenza. O ; a Rufino questo inciso non poteva certo sfuggire. Antipho 6. Et si adquiescunt quod unus atque idem figulus unum sine dubio creatorem designet, diuersi non erunt creatores uel eorum qui saluantur, uel eorum qui pereunt.

Iam sane eligant utrum de bono deo uelint intellegi, qui creat malos et perditos, an de non bono, qui creat bonos et ad honorem paratos. Vnum enim e duobus necessitas ab eis responsionis extorquet. In questo passo, come fanno osservare il Simonetti n.

Ora, in Rufino non solo la confutazione, con la presenza di iam OA ss. Vedi et e o s qui ad honorem et e o s qui ad contumeliam f i u n t, q u o s i p s i salvandae et perditae naturae vacanti Rufino rende esplicita l'identificazione fatta dagli gnostici tra vasi d'onore e di disonore e nature destinate alla salvezza e nature destinate alla perdizione.

Vediamo come si sviluppa questo pensiero: una volta confutata la teoria gnostica delle diverse nature e quella dei diversi creatori in base a Rom. Si ricordi che Origene, proprio per la connessione di Rom. II 9, 7, r. Lo stesso discorso, naturalmente, vale per le om.

Ritengo che questa alterazione non sia casuale. La diffusione dell'Ebraismo e quella del Cristianesimo, dunque, non si distinguono per numero di convcrtiti, ma per il diverso tipo di persecuzione di cui sono oggetto i fedeli delle due religioni. Origene qui, ricordiamo, fa riferimento a Matth. Rufino elimina completamente questo concetto di rincalzo che il contadino fornisce alla terra pietrosa.

Rufino, come ha notato il Rist p. In Rufino, invece, troviamo la contrapposizione tra la fatica e l'impegno che si richiedono all'uomo e la salvezza che proviene da Dio e porta a compimento l'azione umana laboris In secondo luogo, al tempo della traduzione del princ.

Rufino non appare condizionato dal pelagianesimo. Dice bene C. Hammond Bammel, art. Origene esprime lo stesso concetto due volte, la prima volta Ouie Koch, p. Es hat mit Origenes nichts zu tun, wenn man immer wieder scine Freiheitslehre im Lichte der pelagianischen Streitigkeiten betrachtet hat.

La ' scienza ' di Dio dovrebbe dunque essere messa in connessione con Vars figuli. Es ist nicht die Frage der Gnade, welche ihn interessiert Si tratta qui dei diversi ' movimenti ' degli esseri razionali e del giudizio di Dio che, in base a tali ' movimenti ', assegna a ciascuno di essi una diversa posizione-condizione nel cosmo. Per il concetto di utilizzazione da parte di Dio del libero arbitrio dell'essere razionale cf.

Rist, p. Infatti absque Dunque, mentre Origene parla della conoscenza di Dio, Rufino parla della conoscenza dell'uomo, come ben fa rilevare il Crouzel n. Bardy, Citations, pp. Bisogna tener presente il fatto che l'espressione si trova qui per la prima e ultima volta nella trattazione del libero arbitrio del princ. O e elimina l'idea di rapporto vincolante fra azione umana e divina. I 10 SC , p. Nel passo che abbiamo esaminato a p.

Al motivo della perseveranza Rufino aggiunge quello dell'amore per Dio questa stessa coppia di concetti Rufino introduce in RA Bas e D, meglio si spiegherebbe l'alterazione. Ma qui che senso avrebbe dire che le profezie del VT concernenti l'avvento di Cristo hanno conquistato « coloro che sono stati eletti tra le nazioni»?

OBa Questo fa pensare che Rufino cercasse di sintetizzare quei passi che non capiva bene. Rufino, pur mantenendo la suddivisione del VT in legge e scritti profetici in Quibus etiam Infatti, in 'EvaQyfj Se invece si considera la traduzione di Rufino da Quibus etiam Come fa notare il Crouzel n.

Tamen, ut 6 Cf. Rufino, con certum Rufino, infatti, in aptare Da una parte egli con aptare infinito sostantivo soggetto dell'infi- nitiva retta da puto insieme a aperire atque disserere] traduce TGJ Tutto questo ha notevoli conseguenze sul pensiero. Prima di considerare il passo in questione, bisogna rifarsi un poco indietro e soffermarsi su quel punto O , in cui Origene, intro- ducendo la citazione di Hebr.

Il Crouzel n. Questa condizione morale dell'uomo dipende dunque unicamente dal libero arbitrio. Si tratta di comm. VI 25 SC , p. Prat, pp. OA Cosi anche l'azione divina i miracoli d'Egitto nell'episodio biblico dell'indurimento del Faraone, la pioggia nell'esempio di Hebr.

Vili, 2. XIII, » p. Per questo significato, oltre a hom. Vili 2 SC , p. Il concetto di fondo su cui si impernia l'argomentazione origeniana di O sembra essere mutuato allo stoicismo e in particolar modo a Crisippo, che aveva studiato a fondo le cause ed il problema del rapporto tra heimarmene e libero arbitrio. Ricordiamo il paragone del cilindro SVF II , che riassume bene le conclusioni a cui egli era giunto: Sicut lapidem cylindrum si per spatia terrae prona atque derupta iacias, causa quidem ei et initium praecipitantiae fueris, mox ta- men l'Ile praeceps volvitur, non quia tu id iam facis, sed quoniam ita sese modus eius et formae volubilitas habet: sic Tornando alla traduzione di Rufino, riteniamo con il Crouzel n.

V 13 SC , pp. Qui Rufino modifica e sviluppa autonomamente una similitudine di Origene. Osserva il Rist, p. Unimportant theologically, you will say. Perhaps, but not methodologically ». Vediamo ora come Rufino tratta la similitudine di O Sull'immagine del medico in Origene cf. Koch, pp. Colpisce il fatto che nello sviluppo di Rufino troviamo sia l'immagine dei gonfiori in tumoribus vulnerum R sia l'opposizione esterno-interno del corpo festinare I due passi sono compresi in due frammenti di opere non bene identificate sul- VEsodo, per cui cf.

Junod, Origene, Philocalie , pp. Nec tamen ex hoc av JiTaLoifiev, vna. Rufino mantiene la contrapposizione tra azione umana e divina solo nell'esempio della costruzione dell'edificio: non haec humanis viri- bus, sed divina ope ac virtute constructa R Rufino evidentemente ha ritenuto che questo concetto fosse espresso a sufficienza in nonne R e digne In entrambi i casi ci troviamo davanti ad una reminiscenza di Verg. Proprio per questo risulta grave anche l'om.

Vediamo dunque come uno sviluppo d'immagini, apparentemente del tutto innocuo, sia invece per diversi aspetti negativo. Dunque le condizioni del tempo gli eventi esterni vengono scisse dall'azione divina: in Rufino la misericordia divina fa si che la nave torni in porto nonostante le condizioni del mare avverse alla navigazione.

In questo sviluppo Rufino, oltre che d, mi sembra opportuno citare quello in Arr. II 5, 9 ss. In Origene, infatti, « le cose esterne » vengono poste sotto il controllo di Dio. Entrambi i termini, ma soprattutto il secondo, evocano l'immagine di chi procede sul suo cammino e ne viene impedito. Con ut interruptio Origene considera i rischi che la comprensione del solo significato letterale delle Sacre Scritture avrebbe comportato per il lettore, in pri- mis l'allontanamento dalla vera dottrina.

Sic puerilis ae- xal cpaveoo! Per haec enim omnia manifestatur et proditur uniuscuiusque propositum, et perseuerantiae firmitas indicatur, non tam deo, qui nouit omnia antequam fiant, quam rationabilibus caelestibus- que uirtutibus, quae utique procuratio- nem salutis humanae uelut quaedam adiutrices dei ministraeque sortitae sunt.

Con Relinquit Questo concetto nuovo trova sostegno nell'interpolaziene di Hebr. A questo punto quo scilicet Segue l'interpolazione di Rom. Con Per haec Segue una nuova add. Infine, dopo un'ultima add. Hi vero Dunque Rufino conserva quasi tutti gli elementi del periodo greco, ma li dispone meglio sarebbe dire li disperde in un nuovo organismo completamente diverso. Vediamo che quando Rufino si riaccosta a Ori- gene non traduce alla lettera, ma rielabora il pensiero di Origene in base a quella dirczione che egli ha impresso al ragionamento nelle add.

I due esempi del cavallo e del fanciullo Sic equus E interessante osservare come non chiaro sia il loro significato nella traduzione di Rufino: non si capisce se rientrino nel discorso dei peccatori di Is. R e soprattutto in ut per hoc Siamo cosi giunti alla grave discordanza tra Origene e Rufino. Dio infatti « punisce chi ama », i suoi figli Hebr. Athanasius De decretis Nic. Jerome Ad Pammach. They break out unexpectedly, at long intervals, and assume an immense importance quite unforeseen in their humble beginnings.

They are complicated by so many personal disputes and so many questions foreign to the fundamental subject in controversy that a brief and rapid expose of the polemics is difficult and well-nigh impossible. First Origenist Crisis. It broke out in the deserts of Egypt , raged in Palestine, and ended at Constantinople with the condemnation of St.

Chrysostom During the second half of the fourth century the monks of Nitria professed an exaggerated enthusiasm for Origen, whilst the neighboring brethren of Sceta, as a result of an unwarranted reaction and an excessive fear of allegorism, fell into Anthropomorphism.

These doctrinal discussions gradually invaded the monasteries of Palestine, which were under the care of St. Epiphanius , Bishop of Salamis , who, convinced of the dangers of Origenism, had combatted it in his works and was determined to prevent its spread and to extirpate it completely. John in turn spoke against Anthropomorphism , directing his discourse so clearly against Epiphanius that no one could be mistaken.

Another incident soon helped to embitter the dispute. Epiphanius had raised Paulinian, brother of St. Jerome, to the priesthood in a place subject to the See of Jerusalem.

John complained bitterly of this:violation of his rights, and the reply of Epiphanius was not of a nature to appease him. Two new combatants now enter the lists. From the time when Jerome and Rufinus settled, one at Bethlehem and the other on Mt. Olivet, they had lived in brotherly friendship. Both admired, imitated, and translated Origen, and were on most amicable terms with their bishop, when in Aterbius, a monk of Sceta, came to Jerusalem and accused them both of Origenism.

Jerome, very sensitive on the question of orthodoxy, was much hurt by the insinuation of Aterbius and two years later sided with St. Epiphanius , whose reply to John of Jerusalem he translated into Latin. Rufinus learnt, it is not known how, of this translation, which was not intended for the public, and Jerome suspected him of having obtained it by fraud. A reconciliation was effected sometime later, but it was not lasting. Jerome, whose dithyrambic eulogy addressed to the Alexandrian catechist he remembered.

Until Theophilus of Alexandria was an acknowledged Origenist. He had supported John of Jerusalem against St. Epiphanius , whose Anthropomorphism he denounced to Pope Siricius.

Suddenly he changed his views, exactly why was never known. It is said that the monks of Sceta, displeased with his paschal letter of , forcibly invaded his episcopal residence and threatened him with death if he did not chant the palinody. What is certain is that he had quarrelled with St.

He was successful beyond his hopes; the bishops of Cyprus accepted his invitation. Those of Palestine, assembled at Jerusalem , condemned the errors pointed out to them, adding that they were not taught amongst them. Anastasius, while declaring that Origen was entirely unknown to him, condemned the propositions extracted from his books. Jerome undertook to translate into Latin the various elucubrations of the patriarch, even his virulent diatribe against Chrysostom.

Epiphanius , preceding Theophilus to Constantinople , treated St. Chrysostom as temerarious, and almost heretical, until the day the truth began to dawn on him, and suspecting that he might have been deceived, he suddenly left Constantinople and died at sea before arriving at Salamis. Instead of being the accused, he became the accuser, and summoned Chrysostom to appear before the conciliabule of the Oak ad Quercum , at which Chrysostom was condemned.

As soon as the vengeance of Theophilus was satiated nothing more was heard of Origenism. The Patriarch of Alexandria began to read Origen, pretending that he could cull the roses from among the thorns.

Hardly had the personal quarrels abated when the spectre of Origenism vanished cf. Second Origenistic Crisis. This new phrase, quite as intricate and confusing as the former, has been partially elucidated by Prof.

In certain heterodox doctrines of a very singular character had already spread among the monks of Jerusalem and its environs. Possibly the seeds of the dispute may have been sown by Stephen Bar-Sudaili, a troublesome monk expelled from Edessa , who joined to an Origenism of his own brand certain clearly pantheistic views.

Plotting and intriguing continued for about thirty years, the monks suspected of Origenism being in turn expelled from their monasteries, then readmitted, only to be driven out anew.

Their leaders and protectors were Nonnus , who till his death in kept the party together, Theodore Askidas and Domitian who had won the favor of the emperor and were named bishops, one to the See of Ancyra in Galatia, the other to that of Casarea in Cappadocia, though they continued to reside at court Justinian ordered the patriarch Mennas to call together all the bishops present in Constantinople and make them subscribe to these anathemas.

This was the local synod Greek: sunodos endemousa of A copy of the imperial edict had been addressed to the other patriarchs, including Pope Vigilius , and all gave their adhesion to it. In the case of Vigilius especially we have the testimony of Liberatus Breviar.

It had been expected that Domitian and Theodore Askidas, by their refusal to condemn Origenism, would fall into disfavor at Court; but they signed whatever they were asked to sign and remained more powerful than ever. Were Origen and Origenism anathematized? Many learned writers believe so; an equal number deny that they were condemned; most modern authorities are either undecided or reply with reservations. Special letters to all the other churches notified them of the measures taken.

Origen could no longer remain in Egypt. Banished from Alexandria, he withdrew to Caesarea and there commenced the second period of his career. Among his listeners was, for a time, the future St.

Gregory Thaumaturgus. Origen escaped the persecution of Maximinus In , he undertook a journey to Athens, and in another to Arabia, to bring back to the orthodox faith Beryllus, bishop of Bostra. During the Decian persecution he was cast into prison and underwent many tortures which, although they did not kill him, hastened his death. He was set free, but died shortly afterwards, at Tyre in Phoenicia, in or , at the end of his sixty-ninth yeal.

Jerome, the everlasting duration of his writings; we might add, to signify his indefatigable ardor and diligence. Origen's was a mind of insatiable curiosity and of prodigious knowledge, more vast, however, than deep. He grasped all the philosophical, Scriptural, and theological knowledge of his time. Nothing of any importance escaped his notice in ancient literature, sacred or profane. If exception be made of the books of the Epicureans and the Atheists, which he neglected on purpose, he had read all the other works and drawn profit from them all.

However, he had a special predilection for the Sacred Scriptures. Apart from the critical work he undertook on the text of Holy Writ, of which we shall speak later, he had carefully examined all the different accounts and teachings it contained. It is on the authority of the Scriptures that he loves to base his own teaching.

Origen is essentially a Biblical theologian, who formulated almost his entire theology in writing his eommentaries on the Scriptures. This theology is not without faults, and its defects have drawn down upon the author many contradictions and even condemnations. On the whole, however, it has won for him first place among the theologians of the third century.

Undoubtedly, one could desire more firmness and logical sequence in the work of Origen, and yet one cannot but admire the richness and variety of the vistas he opens up. Origen ranks below Clement in purity, refinement, and harmony of style. In fact, he does not aim at writing well, but rather at writing clearly. Yet he is often prolix and diffuse. These defects may be accounted for, however, if we remember that many of his writings were merely lessons or discourses taken down in shorthand, and that the enormous productivity of his pen left him little time to polish his compositions.

Indeed, Origen is the most voluminous writer the Church has ever had and that even antiquity ever knew. Epiphanius speaks of 6, books written by him, but this is evidently an exaggeration since the catalogue of his works given by Eusebius, even though it comprises only the collection made by the priest Pamphylus at Caesarea, did not contain more than 2, titles.

The catalogue made by St. Undoubtedly a great part of the literary output of Origen has been lost. This is due to two causes: first, the enormity of the work itself, so vast indeed that one was forced to make a choice in transcribing, since everything could not be copied; secondly, the condemnations which sully the memory of the author and throw discredit on his books.

More than half of what has been preserved exists now only in Latin translations of the fourth or fifth centuries, and "these are too free and have been retouched too frequently to be taken ]at face value. Biblical Works. It contains Old Testament texts arranged in six columns: a the Hebrew text in Hebrew characters; b the Hebrew text in Greek characters; c the Greek version of Aquila; d the Greek version of Symmachus; e the Greek version of the Septuagint; and f the Greek version of Theodotion.

This disposition of the texts enables one to compare the original with the different versions and so detect at a glance the true meaning of a passage. To facilitate this work still more, Origen made additions to the fifth column, that of the Septuagint. He marked with an obelisk verses or passages found in the Septuagint but missing in the original Hebrew; those which existed in the Hebrew but were wanting in the Septuagint, were borrowed from another version, inserted in the proper column, and indicated by an asterisk.

Origen's purpose was to further a disinterested textual criticism of the Scriptures, for he looked upon the Septuagint as a perfect translation and gave it preference over the original Hebrew. But he wished to furnish controversialists who wrote against the Jews and who were accused by them of not knowing the Hebrew text, with the text itself and its meaning.

The composition of the Hexapla began at Alexandria and was completed at Caesarea, c. Basil and St. Gregory of Nazianzus. It has been re-edited by A. Robinson, Cambridge, Jerome certainly made use of this copy, then in the library of Caesarea, for the composition of his own works. If the entire work was never copied, at least some parts of it were, especially the fifth column, the most important one of all. Of the other columns only a few fragments remain. Matthew, St. John, and the Epistle to the Galatians.

Only a few passages are preserved. The Homilies are familiar talks with the faithful on the Scriptures. The author treats his subject from nearly all points of view: sometimes he discusses the text and fixes its meaning, like a professor; sometimes he draws lessons from the text and thus becomes a preacher and a moralist; sometimes he treats a question of dogma.

About of these homilies on the books of the Old and New Testaments are known, but Origen certainly composed a greater number than this. About have been preserved, most cf them in Latin translations due to Rufinus and to St.

The Commentaries. Unfortunately, Origen's interpretation is allegoristic, and his commentaries are nearly always incomplete. Field, Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt, Oxonii , A few new fragments have since been discovered.

Luke and St. John at Alexandria and at Caesarea, completed after ; and after , upon the Gospel of St. Matthew and the Epistles of St. Paul, except Corinthians and Timothy. He does not seem to have commented upon the Catholic Epistles or the Apocalypse. Only a few citations and some important portions from Greek or Latin translations remain. Jerome prized the second commentary on the Canticle of Canticles as the best of Origen's commentaries and even considered it the author's masterpiece.

The main reason why the greater part of Origen's commentaries has been lost is to be found in the author's neglect to explain the literal sense of the text and his abuse of allegorical exegesis. Convinced that the moral or spiritual sense was more important than the literal or historical meaning, which in some cases could not be accepted, he almost ignored the latter and developed the spiritual sense beyond due measure.

Whilst some of his explanations are true, many are exaggerated and arbitrary. The School of Antioch arose and pointed out the danger of this exegetical subjectivism and kept men from reading such works. Apologetical and Polemical Writings. Origen's principal apologetical work is the treatise Against Celsus , in eight books.

Celsus was a learned Platonist, firmly attached to the national religion, who wrote, c. Thanks to Origen, we possess about nine-tenths of the substance of this work and seven-tenths of it verbatim.

In it Celsus shows a knowledge of Christianity perhaps unique among the pagans of his time and, although he has apprehended neither the originality nor the entire depth of the Christian faith, he has really studied the religion which he attacks. He uses the Holy Scriptures; he marks its difficulties and apparent contradictions; he knows that there exist many sects among the Christians and draws an argument from this fact against the truth of their religion.

Like Voltaire, he is caustic and scornful. Celsus' work does not seem to have had much success at the time when it appeared; it [4] In the "Journal of Egyptian Archaeology" I. Translator's Note. To the four books of the Demonstration of Truth Origen opposes eight of his work and they follow, step by step, the arguments of his opponent.

He quotes him at length except at the beginning and answers his objections and arguments one by one. This work of Origen was held in great esteem in antiquity; in fact, he displayed such prodigious learning in no other book of his.

The reader is greatly impressed by the firmness of the author's faith and the calm manner in which he meets and answers the objections of Celsus. The Contra Celsum is the only work which remains of Origen's apologetical and polemical writings.

We have only a reminder of a certain number of discussions which he had with either the Jews or certain heretics and which had been written down. It may well be that, besides the refutations of the principal heresies which he undertook in his works, he directed special treatises against the one or other of these in particular.

If these treatises ever existed, they are no longer extant. Theological Writings. The Greek text of this work has been lost. The whole work has come down to us in a Latin translation by Rufinus. Unfortunately, this translation is very free; Rufinus has modified and even suppressed certain passages of questionable orthodoxy and introduced in their place passages from other parts of Origen's works.

Of St. Jerome's literal translation we have only about twenty-seven short fragments. The De Principiis was written at Alexandria shortly before , consequently about Origen states his purpose in the introduction.

The whole idea is that of a 36 Summa Theologica and only a genius could have conceived it in Origen's time. Origen divided the De Principiis into four books. The second deals with the world and its creation, man and his origin, the redemption of man by the Incarnation, and the last things. The third book discusses the nature of human freedom, the strife between good and evil, and the final triumph of good.

The fourth is devoted to theories of Scriptural interpretation and exegesis. This attempt of Origen to construct a synthesis of Christian doctrine was premature.

Unhappily, errors crept into the text, which proved injurious to the reputation of the work. Jerome's opinion that the book contains "more evil than good" is exaggerated. The reader is much more struck by the depth of certain views it contains, than by the unfortunate temerity of some of its hypotheses.

Before writing the De Principiis , Origen had composed at Alexandria ten books of Stromata , known to us only through a few citations. This appears to have been a work in which, with the help of Scripture, he explained Christian beliefs, showing on the one hand how they differ from pagan doctrines, and on the other, how they are confirmed by the writings of philosophers.

Two works On the Resurrection should also be mentioned. The first, in two books, was composed at Alexandria; the second, also in two books, was written in dialogue form. Some fragments of this work are cited by Methodius of Olympus, Pamphilus, and St.