Roger Pearse

We were wondering a while ago how reliable the translations of Origen by Rufinus were, and looking at Jerome's accusation that R. chopped out the heretical bits.

Now I was reading the Ancient Christian Writers text of Origen, Dialogue with Heracleides at the weekend, and came across the following interesting thought.

Origen's Commentary on Romans is extant only in a Latin translation by Rufinus. But... in 1941 workmen creating an ammunition dump at the quarries of Tura near Cairo (thanks to Rommel) came across a pile of papyrus books, probably from the ruins of a monastery further up the mountain. They were in Greek, but written in a 7th century Coptic Uncial. The find included works by Didymus the Blind and Origen, one of which was the Dialogue with Heracleides.

But another part of the find was books 5 and 6 of the Commentary on Romans. This means that we can compare the original Greek now for those books with the Latin translation.

According to the ACW introduction, it confirmed the basic reliability of Rufinus' "often maligned" translation.

Perhaps someone could grab the English translation of the work, or the French Sources Chretiennes text, and see what they say on this issue? Nothing like a specific example, eh?

All the best,

Roger Pearse