• A blessed Nativity / Theophany season to all! For users new and old: the forum rules were streamlined when we transitioned to the new software. Please ensure that you are familiar with them. Continued use of the forum means that you (a) know the rules, and (b) pledge that you'll abide by them. For more information, check out the OrthodoxChristianity.Net Rules section. (There are only 2 threads there - Rules, and Administrative Structure.)

Was there Origenism before Origen?

idontlikenames

Sr. Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
230
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
43
Location
Ignorantville, U.S.A.
This is a topic that's being discussed on another forum I visit.

Exactly how much of Apokastasis/Origenism was invented by Origen and how much of it did he receive from a "tradition" of some sort?

Was there Origenism before Origen?

Check out this article by Clement of Alexandria, which seems suggestive of Apokastasis--albeit in a round-about way.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iii.i.viii.html
 

Stavro

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Messages
1,358
Reaction score
0
Points
36
I am not a taker, but I wanted to inquire about the status of Apokastasis in the EO Church ? Is it a dogma like Purgatory in the RC church, or just a teaching believed by many (or few) , and I wanted to inquire about why Origin is also excommunicated by the EO ? For specific teachings ? I am not debating whether he was the author or not of such heresies alleged to him, for there is doubt, but these teachings exist.

Thanks in advance.
 

idontlikenames

Sr. Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
230
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
43
Location
Ignorantville, U.S.A.
The specific teachings which were condemned at Constantinople 553 (so I'm told) are the ones implying pre-existent souls.  the doctine of Apokastasis (Universal salvation) are left open in the air.  It's certainly not dogma (neither is its opposite a pronounced dogma).

I hope that answers some questions.
 

Asteriktos

Strategos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
39,504
Reaction score
266
Points
83
Age
41
idontlikenames

Was there Origenism before Origen?
Secular greek philosophy. It does seem that Clement of Alexandria believed something similar to Origen, which would make sense since they were both using Greek philosophy in their attempt to articulate Christian revelation, and there is obviously a strong tradition to "hold to that which has been handed to you" which they held to.


Stavro

Is it a dogma like Purgatory in the RC church, or just a teaching believed by many (or few) , and I wanted to inquire about why Origin is also excommunicated by the EO ? For specific teachings ?
Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and perhaps some other Alexandrians believed it. St. Gregory of Nyssa possibly believed it; he is the only Orthodox Father who I've heard brought up when it comes to this issue, and this teaching of his is "covered over" like Noah's nakedness.

The specific teachings which were condemned at Constantinople 553
Since Stavro seems unfamiliar with Orthodoxy's position on the matter, it might be beneficial to mention that it was an Ecumenical Council which condemned Origen.
 

Mor Ephrem

Hypatos
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
36,281
Reaction score
163
Points
63
Age
39
Location
New York!
Website
www.orthodoxchristianity.net
Dear Justin,

I could just as easily say Stavro is Orthodox, and so no Ecumenical Council has condemned Origen since there were none after 431.  :p  If we only accept three, and if we haven't condemned Origen, then Origen is not condemned from our perspective by any such council, even if we may not accept certain of his teachings ("covering up even more nakedness" than with St. Gregory).  You disagree, since you accept seven councils.  We're coming at the question from two different circumstances.  Stavro didn't express any doubt about Orthodoxy, he wanted to know about why your Church condemned him and for what.  Forgive me, but you don't seem to have contributed much yet to our understanding of your history regarding this in your last post.  I look forward to more in-depth comments from you on why EOxy condemned Origen posthumously.         
 

Asteriktos

Strategos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
39,504
Reaction score
266
Points
83
Age
41
Regarding the Ecumenical Council, I only meant to clarify the comment that Origen was condemned by "Constantinople 553 (so I'm told)". Regarding the question of why he was condemned, I thought that question had already been answered by idontlikenames. I find much of what Origen wrote extremely insightful, and full of the "savor of Orthodoxy" as Seraphim Rose called it; I saw no reason to go into further detail as to the bad parts of his theology. Nor do I think myself capable of discussing those issue in detail even if I did want to. Besides, I thought we were discussing the origins of Origenism, not the fruit that came from Origenism after he died (again, I only brought it up to clarify, since Stavro asked what Orthodoxy's position was. According to St. Mark of Ephesus, it was not simply to condemn Origen, but to also adopt the opposite belief as true [call it dogmatic if you like]. But now I am getting off course, in more ways than one).
 
Top