Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
why isn't Origen a saint
Most of us heard of the 4th dean of the skool of alexandria Origen and how he contributed to the coptic orthodox church. He was a great person, he was the dean at the age of 18 and his philosphies and teachings were amazing. (i would recommend anybody to read any of his writings)
i just wanted to noe, y isn't he considered a saint like st. clement of alex (who was also a marvelous dean) and the others?
i just wanted to noe, y isn't he considered a saint like st. clement of alex (who was also a marvelous dean) and the others?
Comments
P.S. By the way, I'm talking about the cobbler in the Gabal Mokkatum story.
About him not being a saint because of dismemberment. Didn't the famous egyptian cobbler saint (I always forget his name) also gouge out his eye because it caused him to sin. He's considered a Saint so I don't really see how that argument works for Origen.
P.S. By the way, I'm talking about the cobbler in the Gabal Mokkatum story.
Saint Samaan el Kara3z is the saint you speak of and also i think it is considered wrong in origen's case because of the context of this incident i don't know what the context was so if anyone would like to share that would be great
aghape,
chris
and i reely do want (if any of u can) like details of what he said that was so wrong that he isnt considered a saint.
thx
-Nader
So can someone give a further explanation of the verses… sorry if it doesn’t go with the topic… but sense we talked about castration… so I thought it would be okay… if not, admins you can remove this post and start a different thread.
Biblical scholar and philosopher
"We who by our prayers destroy all demons which stir up wars, violate oaths, and disturb the peace are of more help to the emperors than those who seem to be doing the fighting."
This third century "religious fanatic" gave up his job, slept on the floor, ate no meat, drank no wine, fasted twice a week, owned no shoes, and reportedly castrated himself for the faith. He was also the most prolific scholar of his age (with hundreds of works to his credit), a first-rate Christian philosopher, and a profound student of the Bible.
Child prodigy Origen Adamantius ("man of steel") was born near Alexandria about A.D. 185. The oldest of seven children in a Christian home, he grew up learning the Bible and the meaning of commitment. In 202 when his father, Leonidas, was beheaded for his Christian beliefs, Origen wanted to die as a martyr, too. But his mother prevented him from even leaving the house—by hiding his clothes.
To support his family, the 18-year-old Origen opened a grammar school, copied texts, and instructed catechumens (those seeking to become members of the church). He himself studied under the pagan philosopher Ammonius Saccas in order to better defend his faith against pagan arguments. When a rich convert supplied him with secretaries, he began to write.
Bible student and critic
Origen worked for 20 years on his Hexapla, a massive work of Old Testament analysis written to answer Jewish and Gnostic critics of Christianity. An examination of Biblical texts, it had six parallel columns: one in Hebrew, and the other five in various Greek translations, including one he found at Jericho in a jar. It became an important step in the development of the Christian canon and scriptural translation, but unfortunately it was destroyed. So massive was it that scholars doubt anyone ever copied it entirely.
This first Bible scholar analyzed the Scriptures on three levels: the literal, the moral, and the allegorical. As he put it, "For just as man consists of body, soul, and spirit, so in the same way does the Scripture." Origen, in fact, preferred the allegorical not only because it allowed for more spiritual interpretations, but many passages he found impossible to read literally: "Now what man of intelligence will believe that the first and the second and the third day … existed without the sun and moon and stars?" In any event, Origen's method of interpretation became the standard in the Middle Ages. Origen's main work, De Principiis (On First Principles), was the first systematic exposition of Christian theology ever written. In it he created a Christian philosophy, synthesizing Greek technique and biblical assumptions. Add to these massive works his homilies and commentaries, and it's clear why he was reputed to have kept seven secretaries busy and caused Jerome (c.354–420) to say in frustrated admiration, "Has anyone read everything that Origen wrote?"
Heretical church father?
Origen has always been controversial. His reported self-mutilation, in response to Matthew 19:12 ("… there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven….") was condemned as a drastic misinterpretation of the text. In Palestine he preached without being ordained and was so condemned by his bishop, Demetrius. When on a second trip, he was ordained by the same bishops who had invited him to speak the first time, Demetrius sent him into exile.
While some of his writings are thought to have been hypothetical, Origen did teach that all spirits were created equal, existed before birth, and then fell from grace. Furthermore, "those rational beings who sinned and on account fell from the state in which they were, in proportion to their particular sins, were enslaved in bodies as punishment"—some demons, some men, and some angels. He also believed that all spirits, even Satan, could be saved. "The power of choosing between good and evil is within the reach of all," he wrote.
Most notably, however, Origen described the Trinity as a hierarchy, not as an equality of Father, Son, and Spirit. And though he attacked Gnostic beliefs, like them, he rejected the goodness of material creation.
Three centuries after his death, the Council of Constantinople (553) pronounced him a heretic: "Whoever says or thinks that the punishment of demons and the wicked will not be eternal … let him be anathema."
Some contend that Origen was merely trying to frame the faith in the ideas of his day; still his works were suppressed following his condemnation, so modern judgment is impossible.
Despite such condemnation, Origen said, "I want to be a man of the church … to be called … of Christ." His Contra Celsum, in fact, is one of the finest defenses of Christianity produced in the early church. Answering the charge that Christians, by refusing military service, fail the test of good citizenship, he wrote, "We who by our prayers destroy all demons which stir up wars, violate oaths, and disturb the peace are of more help to the emperors than those who seem to be doing the fighting."
The authorities, however, were not convinced: in 250 the emperor Decius had Origen imprisoned and tortured. He was deliberately kept alive in the hope that he would renounce his faith. But Decius died first and Origen went free. His health broken, Origen died shortly after his release.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/special/131christians/origen.html
thanks alot socoolbishoy, that rox
-nader
GB ALL
+FROG+
GOD IS GREAT!!!!
There can be little doubt that Origen taught things that were later rejected by the Church. However it is a great and grave injustice to him if he be remembered for his errors only. His Orthodoxy outweighs his errors by far.
Origen is the primary source for St. Athanasios' teaching on the Divinity of the Son and the Father, he is the main source for Cappadocian trinitarianism, he is the founder of systematic biblical studies, the founder of "spiritual direction" as it would later be integrated into monasticism, the foremost bulwark of Orthodoxy against gnosticism as well as paganism, and on top of it all he is a martyr whose grave was venerated up until the 13th century.
After St. Paul, Origen is the most influential and most important of all theologians ever to have been graciously given to the Church by God. The reason Origen is not canonized is that his name is burdened by accusations of heresy. Sts. Epiphanius and Jerome have attempted a radical and heretical re-reading of Origen that was highly succesfull. The fact that Origen is not canonized is the fruit of their work.
The story of Origen's self-mutilation is often told, but there is no direct evidence of it. The evidence comes (mostly) from sources hostile to Origen except for one: Eusebius. The latter was heir to Origen's complete library and personal correspondence and was an admirer of Origen. Eusebius was also familiar with people who had personally known Origen. It is this Eusebius who also relates the story of Origen's selfmutilation and it is this circumstantial evidence that gives the strongest support to it. IMO the evidence is strong enough to affirm that Origen probably did do it.
However, the circumstances under which he did it are also explained by Eusebius. Origen was a renowned teacher and taught both; man and women. Inspired by the Biblical text mentioend earlier in this thread, and by a desire to remove all suspicions of "unsavory relations with women" he mutilated himself by castration. Mutilation in one form or another, was a not unfrequent escape practiced by monks in the later Egyptian desert who sought to escape ordination. St. Evagrios the Solitary was once rebuked that his silence while being a learned man was as if he had cut out his tongue. Mutilation, was practiced, but not generally approved by the fathers.
It is my personal experience and conviction that the clearing of Origen's name is a task for the Church today so that the Church can officially award him the place among the saints and martyrs where (I think) he belongs.
IC XC
Grigorii
The reason I ask, is because many great saints in history mutilated themselves in one form or another in the name of Christ, and though they may have taken the interpretation of certain verses to literal extremes, they nonetheless did so with good and honest intentions.
St Simon the taner as was previously mentioned in this thread, pierced his eye in the name of the verse that calls upon the believer to pluck his eye out with a needle if tempted. God responded to this faith of his, by making him the figure through whose prayers and presence, the al-Mokattam mountain would be moved such that the Coptic Christian race would continue to be fruitful in the land of Egypt. There was also two great female saints who were created in such beautiful form that they greatly attracted certain men. In wishing to remain chaste, they thus sought to repulse these men; one by cutting her beautiful lips with a blade, and the other by biting her tongue until it bled (if someone can remember their names for me that would be great) - they both received the crown of martyrdom and many miracles are performed in their name.
I guess the argument can be made, that unlike Origen, these figures were not theologians or scholars, such that their simple manner of thinking cannot be held against them, considering their honest intentions....but still even if at this one moment Origen's good spiritual intentions overided his able intellectual discernment; I don't find it reasonable to expect that this be held against him...
Peace.
Thanks for relating this, it is so obvious,.. But it never caught my attention before in this way. My blind eye is really quite blind. :-[
I mean it was at Justinian's express desire that Patriarch Menas of Consatntinople held a council in 543 where he accepted Justinian's condemnations of Origen, and this same Justinian sent out a letter with an extended version of condemnations against Origen shortly before the second council of Constantinople (the 5th Ec. Council in EO Tradition). Though this letter was not part of this council nor was it voted upon by the council, it was later added to the minutes of this council (not unlikely by anti-Origenist and perhaps anti-Alexandrian motives). It is also interresting that it was Origenist theologians such as Leontius of Byzantium who moved away from a two-natures christology towards a more one-nature christology (eventhough they formally accepted Chalcedon).
As to the mutilations, St. Evagrios was rebuked somewhere in the late 380-ies or early 390-ies,.. Pretty much at the beginning of Monasticism. It seems that our fathers the monastics have rejected the "self-mutilation" from the beginning, and that its (the selfmutilation) origin was pre-Chalcedonian. I would seek the origins of such behavior in paganism rather than Christianity. Our fathers were right to reject such extremism.
IC XC
Grigorii
Origen was arrested (hardly surprising since he never tried to escape the authorities but defied them in Jesus' Name), and was brutally tortured in his old age. The tyrant finally gave up torturing the old man who didn't give an inch but gloried in his suffering for Christ's sake. Origen was released, but never recovered from his wounds. He died the death of a martyr soon after being set free.
So, yes he died as a direct result of his tortures which he suffered for Christ's sake. And that makes him a martyr. May his prayers be with us, amen.
IC XC
Grigorii
...are you planning to start a revolution? :D
Peace.
No, no revolutions,.. Ecxept for the revolution of the Incarnation i don't believe in them :D
But in my private devotions I invoke him for his intercessions which is perfectly in accordance with Orthodox practice. If I would be a priest or deacon and try this in Church I would be in trouble, for only canonized saints are allowed to be invoked in Liturgy. Ones private devotions must remain simply that. Personal prayer. The invocation of his name is an expression of my personal devotion and should not be taken to mean anything beyond that.
However, canonization doesn't make a saint, canonization is simply ecclesial recognition of somebody who was made a saint by Christ and His Father and Holy Spirit. Canonization is not necessary for "sainthood" but it is necessary if the sainthood of a person is to be ecclesially invoked.
I must therefore clearly state that I do not promote the invocation of Origen (nor do i use the prefix "St." ) in an ecclesial way. I await the decsion of the Church in this matter as the obscured figure of Origen becomes better known to us.
IC XC
Grigorii
I guess this also brings up the question concerning what it is exactly that gives certain figures their intercessory abilities - is it simply by virtue of the fact that they have escaped the restraints of their physical body, and the restraints of time, such that their souls in the eternal realm are capable of hearing our prayers in order to consequently beseech God on our behalf (such that we can privately invoke the prayers of anyone really), or is it more a special priveledge assigned to a select few based on their righteousness before God?
My inquiry is probably superflous, but its a curious one that is not dealt with by the Church or the fathers, unless I am mistaken...
Peace.
Most of us heard of the 4th dean of the skool of alexandria Origen and how he contributed to the coptic orthodox church. He was a great person, he was the dean at the age of 18 and his philosphies and teachings were amazing. (i would recommend anybody to read any of his writings)
i just wanted to noe, y isn't he considered a saint like st. clement of alex (who was also a marvelous dean) and the others?
He held many heretical doctrines which were condemned by the Councils and the Holy Fathers, such as the pre-existance of the soul, the unification of Christ's divinity to His pre-existing human soul before His birth from the Theotokos, that we were given bodies as punishment from God, that all will be saved in the end (inc. Satan), etc, etc, etc.
he did things that were not appropriate by the church... like cutting off a part of his body...
What's wrong with that? Didn't Jesus Himself say to do that if it interferes with obeying God? What about St. Simon the tanner?
[quote author=SuperMAN(BAM) link=topic=1747.msg27003#msg27003 date=1117652578]
he did things that were not appropriate by the church... like cutting off a part of his body...
What's wrong with that? Didn't Jesus Himself say to do that if it interferes with obeying God? What about St. Simon the tanner?
it is not like Saint Simon. Saint Simon did whatever he did instantaneously to NOT fall into sin, even though it was not right to take the Scripture in this literal way.
Origen on the other hand became a "eunuch" by his choice. that was one of the reasons, but not the only one. he had many teachings that were against our Orthodoxy.
so now lets think about the scholar Origen... he castrated himself, as painful as that sound! but from what I know, he never was in temptation, no girl was in front of him... so if he were tempted, he had time to walk to his place of living and then cut it... by then he would have thought about what he can do, and by then the Spirit would have talked to him, and probably he refuted it!
keep in mind saint simon was not educated in the bible, he would just learn a verse here or there when he would give people water... while on the other hand scholar Origen would have four or five people writing and he would tell each one what to write, all in the same time... each one with a different topic! so if you ask me, he's one smart person!
maybe the church would have gotten over that... but as in the article I posted, here are some reasons of why the church does not agree on his views...
Most notably, however, Origen described the Trinity as a hierarchy, not as an equality of Father, Son, and Spirit. And though he attacked Gnostic beliefs, like them, he rejected the goodness of material creation.
...He also believed that all spirits, even Satan, could be saved...
among many other reasons, which you can search on your own!
akhadna el baraka... neshkor Allah!
Meaning that our souls have always existed and it has already been determined whether we go to heaven or hell.
Father Peter