The Origenist Controversy
The Origenist controversy is often traced to when (St.) Sabbas, an elderly monk, came to Constantinople, seeking help both for a local Samaritan rebellion and a group of monks following a specific interpretation of Origen. It is debatable as to how faithfully these monks actually followed Origen’s own thought. They had been inspired by Evangrius of Pontus, who had been a desert monastic from 383-399 and was himself inspired by Origen. Regardless, the fifth century Origenists believed and taught the following:
1) pre-existence of souls, an existence that was probably co-eternal with God
2) a “pre-fall” fall of these souls—the souls fell into bodies prior to the fall of humanity described in Genesis
3) All souls will eventually return to their original position of contemplating God (described by the word apokatastasis, or “restoration”)
4) One soul, the soul of Christ, does not fall; this makes the Incarnation, not the assumption, or taking on, of fallen humanity, but a manifestation of a pre-existing, unfallen humanity
The “Three Chapters” and Pope Vigilius
Initially, Justinian believed that the “monophysite” controversy after Chalcedon and the Origenist crisis could be handled by a local synod and the support of the patriarchs and senior bishops.
In 543, Justinian asked Patriarch Menas of Constantinople to hold a synod for the purpose of condemning the Origenists. That council condemned Origenism broadly, condemning both the specifics of Origenism and a broader perspective. For example, the council condemned not only the idea of all the souls eventually returning to their original state of contemplation, but also the idea of a universal salvation more generally.
The real difficulty occurred with what became known as the “three chapters,” a name given to statements made by Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus, and Ibas of Edessa, which were condemned in a decree by Justinian. This is because Theodore had been the teacher of Nestorius (and so was blamed for Nestorianism) and Theodoret and Ibas had initially sided with Nestorius but later retracted and were re-instated by the council at Chalcedon (therefore, the non-Chalcedonians or “monophysites” viewed Chalcedon, with suspicion).
One of the main opponents to the “three chapters” was Pope Vigilius of Rome and the deacon Facundas, bishop of Hermiana (who was in the pope’s entourage). Vigilius traveled to Constantinople where, after debating the matter, proclaimed a judicatum, or papal adjudication, to Patriarch Menas in which Vigilius condemned the three chapters. However, during the debates themselves, Facundas began drafting a work against Vigilius’ Judicatum. Upon learning of the Western objections, Vigilius asked to retract his judicatum, at which point Justinian realized an ecumenical council would be needed.
Pope Vigilius refused to attend and produced a document that did condemn some statements made by Theodore of Mopsuestia, but did not condemn Theodore personally. Additionally, the pope condemned those condemning the “three chapters.” The Council rejected this, citing Vigilius’ prior condemnation of the three chapters, and claiming it was “serving unity with the apostolic see of Old Rome” by removing its errant bishop (Pope Vigilius)!
Council’s Rulings:
Used the “theopaschite” formula
Condemned Theodore of Mopsuestia himself
Condemned certain writings of Theodoret of Cyrus and Ibas of Edessa’s Letter to Maris the Persian.
Condemned Origen, Didymus the Blind, and Evagrius of Pontus, those who taught and developed what became “Origenism” in the fifth century. The points of condemnation, however, were more specific than at the earlier local council. For instance, rather than condemning the salvation of all in Christ, the Ecumenical Council condemned only the belief in the return of all souls to a state of disembodied contemplation.
Six months later, Pope Vigilius changed his mind again and accepted the Council’s rulings. He was recognized as the legitmate pope by the Eastern bishops once again and returned to Rome, but died on the way.
