Author Topic: St. Origen?  (Read 2808 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Irenaeus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • William Possidento, Realtor®
St. Origen?
« on: September 29, 2003, 12:35:09 AM »
Have any Christian communions canonically declared Origen a saint?

Offline Justinianus

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 255
Re:St. Origen?
« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2003, 07:54:05 AM »
I do not think so, some of his writings were what the Egyptian priest Arius based his views on.  Of course these led to the whole heresy of Arianism.  It is not to say Origen is the origin of Arianism, but Arius' interpretation of some of the writings of Origen led him down the path to consider  the Son a creation of the Father at a point in time long ago and of less divinity than the Father.
"If we truly think of Christ as our source of holiness, we shall refrain from anything wicked or impure in thought or act and thus show ourselves to be worthy bearers of his name.  For the quality of holiness is shown not by what we say but by what w

Offline Doubting Thomas

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 883
  • Anglican (but not Episcopagan)
Re:St. Origen?
« Reply #2 on: September 29, 2003, 08:20:47 AM »
It's my understanding that Origen was condemned as a heretic at the FIFTH Ecumenical Council, but I can't recall the details.
"My Lord and My God!"--Doubting Thomas, AD 33

Offline Elisha

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,574
Re:St. Origen?
« Reply #3 on: September 29, 2003, 11:23:49 AM »
I do not think so, some of his writings were what the Egyptian priest Arius based his views on.  Of course these led to the whole heresy of Arianism.  It is not to say Origen is the origin of Arianism, but Arius' interpretation of some of the writings of Origen led him down the path to consider  the Son a creation of the Father at a point in time long ago and of less divinity than the Father.

Keep mind though, with that viewpoint, we shouldn't then consider Blessed Augustine a saint since the heretical views of predestination (especially Calvinistic) and irresistable grace were based on his writings to some extent - and we know that Augustine IS considered a saint by the Orthdox.

Btw, I'm reading The Role of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church (or whatever it's called) by Fr. Seraphim Rose for the second time right now.  A very good read.

Offline irishorthodox

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • St. Padraig
Re:St. Origen?
« Reply #4 on: September 29, 2003, 03:52:30 PM »
Origen recanted, let's not defame a fellow orthodox who has been willing to embrace metanoia.  There were those who followed his Ideas who were heretics. One cannot deny his influence.
We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.   Robert Wilensky
Know the difference between success and fame.

Offline Justinianus

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 255
Re:St. Origen?
« Reply #5 on: September 29, 2003, 05:00:06 PM »
I do not think so, some of his writings were what the Egyptian priest Arius based his views on.  Of course these led to the whole heresy of Arianism.  It is not to say Origen is the origin of Arianism, but Arius' interpretation of some of the writings of Origen led him down the path to consider  the Son a creation of the Father at a point in time long ago and of less divinity than the Father.

Keep mind though, with that viewpoint, we shouldn't then consider Blessed Augustine a saint since the heretical views of predestination (especially Calvinistic) and irresistable grace were based on his writings to some extent - and we know that Augustine IS considered a saint by the Orthdox.

Btw, I'm reading The Role of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church (or whatever it's called) by Fr. Seraphim Rose for the second time right now.  A very good read.

I understand your point, but some of Origen's points were condemned by the 5th Ecumenical Council.  It could be that some in the Church at that time considered his ideas a more serious heresy than those of Augustine.  Augustine's percieved heresy could be one of interpretation and Origen's could be one more blatant or more directly against a Truth of the Church.  I am not saying that is the case, because I have not read much of either one, but it could explain why Augustine is a saint and Origen is not.
"If we truly think of Christ as our source of holiness, we shall refrain from anything wicked or impure in thought or act and thus show ourselves to be worthy bearers of his name.  For the quality of holiness is shown not by what we say but by what w

Offline lee_malatesta

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • OrthodoxChristianity.net
Re:St. Origen?
« Reply #6 on: September 29, 2003, 11:06:28 PM »
Origen recanted, let's not defame a fellow orthodox who has been willing to embrace metanoia.

What evidence is there that Origen recanted of being condemned as a heretic several centuries after his death? Origen lived in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Many of his teachings were declared anathema in the 6th century at the fifth Ecumenical council.

I don't know that there exists any text that suggests that Origen would have reason to believe that he ought to recant of anything.
NULL

Offline Elisha

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,574
Re:St. Origen?
« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2003, 11:43:29 AM »
I do not think so, some of his writings were what the Egyptian priest Arius based his views on.  Of course these led to the whole heresy of Arianism.  It is not to say Origen is the origin of Arianism, but Arius' interpretation of some of the writings of Origen led him down the path to consider  the Son a creation of the Father at a point in time long ago and of less divinity than the Father.

Keep mind though, with that viewpoint, we shouldn't then consider Blessed Augustine a saint since the heretical views of predestination (especially Calvinistic) and irresistable grace were based on his writings to some extent - and we know that Augustine IS considered a saint by the Orthdox.

Btw, I'm reading The Role of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church (or whatever it's called) by Fr. Seraphim Rose for the second time right now.  A very good read.

I understand your point, but some of Origen's points were condemned by the 5th Ecumenical Council.  It could be that some in the Church at that time considered his ideas a more serious heresy than those of Augustine.  Augustine's percieved heresy could be one of interpretation and Origen's could be one more blatant or more directly against a Truth of the Church.  I am not saying that is the case, because I have not read much of either one, but it could explain why Augustine is a saint and Origen is not.  

Origin was condemned as a heretic; Augustine was not.  Big difference.  The only thing Augustine was guilty of was overly-logical explanations of Grace and free will that were later falsely extrapolated on by others.  Augustine even realizes this possibility in some of his later writings.  Either read the book I mentioned or read the writings of some of his contemporaries (e.g. St. John Cassian, St. Vincent of Lerrins, etc.).  They were all very charitable with each other.

Offline Justinianus

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 255
Re:St. Origen?
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2003, 01:00:36 PM »

Origin was condemned as a heretic; Augustine was not.  Big difference.  The only thing Augustine was guilty of was overly-logical explanations of Grace and free will that were later falsely extrapolated on by others.  Augustine even realizes this possibility in some of his later writings.  Either read the book I mentioned or read the writings of some of his contemporaries (e.g. St. John Cassian, St. Vincent of Lerrins, etc.).  They were all very charitable with each other.

You are correct, that is why I was confused when you brought St. Augustine into the discussion. I do not see what his example has to do with Origen.  The question was about whether or not Origen was a saint.  I suppose St. Augustine can be discussed in another thread.
"If we truly think of Christ as our source of holiness, we shall refrain from anything wicked or impure in thought or act and thus show ourselves to be worthy bearers of his name.  For the quality of holiness is shown not by what we say but by what w

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,894
  • "In those days I will pour out my Spirit..."
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
Re:St. Origen?
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2003, 01:12:44 PM »
I don't mean to detract from the conversation, or to discourage it, but it seems that the discussion is now discussing the merits of Origen and whether or not he was/is "canonisable", when the original post, I think, could be answered by simply consulting Church calendars.  Am I missing something?
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

Mor no longer posts on OCNet.  He follows threads, posts his responses daily, occasionally starts threads, and responds to private messages when and as he wants.  But he really isn't around anymore.


Offline Elisha

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,574
Re:St. Origen?
« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2003, 01:34:07 PM »
Justinianus,

My point was that Origen is not a saint because his theology was flat out heretical - not just because he was misunderstood (the Augustinian comparison), misinterpreted, extrapolated on, etc.  It was just a wondering - something to keep in mind as I put it.

Hypo-Ortho

  • Guest
Re:St. Origen?
« Reply #11 on: October 01, 2003, 07:22:18 AM »
I don't mean to detract from the conversation, or to discourage it, but it seems that the discussion is now discussing the merits of Origen and whether or not he was/is "canonisable", when the original post, I think, could be answered by simply consulting Church calendars.  Am I missing something?

Good point, Mor!!! ;D

Hypo