Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!
Yes Patriarch Theophilos condemned Origen over a century before the Byzantine Fifth Council, so I understand that we in Oriental Orthodox, particularly Ethiopian Orthodox who shared Alexandria's history until 1959, also condemn Origen.
A synodical letter should be sent to myself and the bishop of Constantinople and to any others whom you think fit; that by universal consent Origen himself may be expressly condemned and also the infamous heresy of which he was the author.
Patriarch Theophilos to
Theophilus, bishop, to the well-beloved and most loving brother, the presbyter Jerome. The reverend bishop Agatho with the well-beloved deacon Athanasius is accredited to you with tidings relating to the church. When you learn their import I feel no doubt but that you will approve my resolution and will exult in the church's victory. For we have cut down with the prophet's sickle Joel 3:13 certain wicked fanatics who were eager to sow broadcast in the monasteries of Nitria the heresy of Origen. We have remembered the warning words of the apostle, rebuke with all authority. Titus 2:15 Do you therefore on your part, as you hope to receive a share in this reward, make haste to bring back with scriptural discourses those who have been deceived. It is our desire, if possible, to guard in our days not only the Catholic faith and the rules of the church, but the people committed to our charge, and to give a quietus to all strange doctrines.
Patriarch Theophilos letter to
However, as with the later condemnations of the 6th century, Alexandria's beef was more so with contemporary heretics rather than Origen himself. Most of the anathemas were directed towards them, Origen was condemned to quell those heresies by delegitimizing the writings they used as the basis of their heresies.
That Origen was condemned posthumously caused no shortage of controversy at the time, and even more so during the Fifth Council in the 540s. Many fathers felt it was in poor taste and beyond their ecclesiastical authority to condemn dead folks, particularly since they have no ability to defend and explain themselves or further to recant or repent. So many folks were quite upset about this condemnation. However, other heresies contemporary to the 5th and 6th centuries were growing and abusing the more questionable writings and ideas either by Origen or attributed to him.
This is in reality what was a similar situation for Eutyches, his followers from his monastery were more adamantly teaching the heresies attributed to him. This is why he recanted when confronted, and I understand was exonerated of his condemnations. I can say that it is right to remove Origen from our canons because his writings can be obscure, abstract, and even confusing, but I'm not sure he should have been outright condemned as a heretic, as with Eutyches, we need to be more sure that it is in fact Origen himself that taught these things, and not folks who attributed such to his name.