A Larger Hope 1
Page 11
St. Anthony
The learned monk Hieracas, too, espoused Origen’s doctrines, very probably including that of universal restoration. Origen’s thought, indeed, spread very early in the Egyptian desert, and St. Anthony (c.251–356) himself—the celebrated father of desert monasticism—is the most prominent example. He wrote many letters to his disciples in which, like Origen, he postulated the original unity of all rational beings (Letter 3:4), who have the same “intellectual essence” (ousia noera). Rational creatures fell from that unity into a state of death (Letter 5:16–8).154 But the Logos will bring them back to their original state, in a “restoration [apokatastasis] of the spirit” (Letters 2 and 4–6), a restoration to the original “nature of our essence,” in virtue and knowledge, without evil any more (Letter 7). Anthony foresees a “resurrection of the heart from the earth” (Letters 4 and 6), which is a spiritual resurrection.155 The restoration is enabled by the acquisition of knowledge and the awareness of one’s spiritual essence. The role of Christ is essential; he came “for every rational being” and will free every rational being, once each one has acquired knowledge and discernment (Letter 2). The “resurrection of minds” as well as “the remission of sins” are operated by Christ (Letter 2; see also Letters 3; 5; 6; 7). One might even argue that the spirituality of the early monastics out in the desert was underpinned by the by kinds of theological ideas taught by Origen.
Dionysius of Alexandria
Dionysius († 265), bishop of Alexandria, was a pupil of Origen and wrote a letter on martyrdom to him;156 as a bishop he also reconciled his teacher with the Alexandrian clergy. The apology for Origen preserved by Photius (Bibl. cod. 117) cites Dionysius’ works among “the texts in favor of Origen.” Indeed, Dionysius composed an Apology for Origen in four books. Athanasius in turn wrote an apology for Dionysius himself. Dionysius wished that all Christians might “entertain sublime and lofty views” about “the divinity, in its glory and its true dignity, about the resurrection of humans from the dead, and about their union with God and their assimilation to God” (Prom. 1). He clearly followed Origen with respect to the eventual universal restoration and “deification.” This perspective is entirely consistent with his linguistic awareness in regard to the terminology of eternity.157 He comments on Ecclesiastes 1:4 (“One generation passes away, another comes, but the earth endures for the aeon [εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα/eis ton aiōna]”) remembering well both the scriptural polysemy of αἰών/aiōn and αἰώνιος/aiōnios and Origen’s doctrine of a series of aeons prior to the eventual restoration. Thus, Dionysius remarks that the Bible reads, “for the aeon,” and not “for the aeons” (εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας/eis tous aiōnas); this is why the earth will remain for this aeon, but not for all aeons, and not eternally. Indeed, αἰών/aiōn and αἰώνιος/aiōnios in Scripture never mean “eternity” and “eternal” unless they refer to God. Commenting on Ecclesiastes 3:11 (“clarify to me the brevity of my days”), Dionysius proves well aware that αἰών/aiōn does not indicate eternity, but on the contrary one’s life in the present world: “the end of this αἰών/aiōn, that is, of the present life.”
The First Defenders of Origen: Gregory the Wonderworker and Pamphilus
Gregory the Wonderworker
St. Gregory the Wonderworker (c.213–c.270) was a disciple of Origen and at the end of his studies with him addressed a thanksgiving oration to him.158 Macrina the Elder († c.340), the grandmother of Basil and Gregory of Nyssa,159 was a disciple of the Wonderworker, who brought Christianity to Neocaesarea.160 And the Christianity he brought was Origen’s Christianity. From Origen Gregory the Wonderworker surely learnt the doctrine of universal restoration; therefore, in Pan. 17 he calls Christ “the one who saves all humans, even those who are half dead and deprived of all; he is the Protector and Healer of all, the Logos, the tireless Savior of all.” Rufinus too, toward the end of the first book of his apology against Jerome, attests that Gregory the Wonderworker taught the doctrine of universal salvation. The Wonderworker transmitted this doctrine to Gregory of Nyssa, Macrina the Elder and the Younger, and probably also Gregory Nazianzen, who—as I will show—were all supporters of universal restoration and salvation. So we can trace the line of transmission of Origen’s teaching from Origen himself, through his disciple Gregory the Wonderworker, to those we now know as the Cappadocian fathers.
Pamphilus
Origen was a figure of some controversy, even during his lifetime, and this inspired his supporters to write defences or apologies for him.161 The first to do so was St. Pamphilus Martyr. Pamphilus, a disciple of Pierius in Alexandria (director of the Cathechetical School there), followed in Origen’s footsteps by moving from Egypt to Caesarea in Palestine, where he founded a Christian school162 at which both philology and philosophy were studied and primarily applied to Scripture, and women were received among students just as they were at Origen’s school. Pamphilus restored and expanded Origen’s Caesarea library with the assistance of Eusebius, his disciple, who wanted to be called “Eusebius (spiritual son) of Pamphilus.” During Pamphilus’ long detention prior to his death as a martyr (307–10 CE) he wrote an apology for Origen in five books; after his death, Eusebius added a sixth. (Only Rufinus’ translation of the first book into Latin is extant.) The seventh accusation from which Pamphilus defends Origen deals with universal salvation. Origen was mistakenly accused of not postulating any punishment in the next world for sinners. On the contrary, as Pamphilus was aware, Origen did foresee purifying punishments, even very long ones, for those who most need purification.163
Methodius, a Critic of Origen Who Espoused Universal Salvation
It would be easy for us, knowing how suspicious the church later became of universalism, to imagine that the controversies surrounding Origen in his day must have been focused around his doctrine of apokatastasis. In fact, in large part this was not the case; indeed, many of his earliest critics were in fact themselves universalists. We can illustrate this by Methodius, Bishop of Olympus in Lycia († 311ca). Methodius is cited by Socrates as an opponent of Origen, but he was also influenced by Origen in many respects, and his few criticisms of Origen’s ideas derive from misunderstanding (e.g., of the philosophical terminology of “form” and “substratum” used by Origen in his treatment of the resurrection: Methodius misunderstood the metaphysical form as a sense-perceptible shape). What is more, nowhere does Methodius attack Origen’s doctrine of universal salvation. On the contrary, he adhered to it. In the sixth book of Pamphilus’ apology for Origen, Eusebius complained against Methodius for writing against Origen even though in fact he embraced many doctrines of Origen’s (Jerome C. Ruf. 1:11). Methodius in his last work expressed much admiration for Origen, as a withdrawal of previous criticisms.164
Methodius starts from the presupposition that God, “according to the Apostle, wants all human beings to be saved and attain the knowledge of truth” (Symp. 2:7). Like Clement, he considered the Apocalypse of Peter to be inspired. Since this text envisages the eventual liberation of the damned from hell (“the river of fire”), it seems that Methodius regarded this doctrine as inspired as well, and therefore supported it. This is confirmed both by several passages from Methodius, which I will quote in a moment, and suggested by his use of terminology: he describes punishment in the next world only as αἰώνιος/aiōnios “otherworldly,” and never as ἀΐδιος /aïdios, “eternal.”165 This is consistent with his adhesion to the doctrine of apokatastasis.
In his dialogue On the resurrection and his Symposium, Methodius depicts physical death as providential. The death of the body was wanted by God “so that, by means of the dissolution of the body, sin might be destroyed completely, up to its very roots” (De res. ch. 4). This enables restoration and salvation. Indeed, this is confirmed in the Greek text preserved by Photius: “Death was given by God as a gift to those who had sinned, for this purpose: that evil might not remain immortal” (Bibl. cod. 234). Evil mu
st come to an end. This is the aim of the “skin tunics”—that is, mortality—that God gave to Adam and Eve after the fall: God “prepared the skin tunics, wrapping, so to say, the human being in mortality, with a view to this: that, thanks to the destruction of the body, all the evil born in it might die” (ibid.). Indeed, “God excogitated even death for our sake, in order to eliminate sin: that sin might not perdure in us eternally” (ibid., p. 296a). God introduced the death of the body for all humans, in order to spare them an eternal spiritual death:
Our tabernacles will be stably built when the body rises, with bones that are again joined and united to the flesh: then we shall really celebrate a feast for the Lord, when we receive eternal tabernacles, not doomed to perish and dissolve in the ashes of the grave. Now, our tabernacle at the beginning was well solid, but it was shaken by transgression and bent toward the earth, because God put a limit to sin by means of death, to avoid that the human being, immortal, living in sin and with sin alive in it, should be liable to an eternal condemnation. Therefore, he died, and the soul was separated from flesh, so that sin might die thanks to (physical) death, given that it cannot survive in a dead person. Therefore, once sin is dead and destroyed, I shall rise immortal, and I praise God because, through (temporary physical) death, he has liberated his children from (spiritual eternal) death. (Symp. 9:2)
This paves the way to universal restoration and salvation. Physical death limits the duration of evil, and thereby also that of spiritual death. This will not be eternal. Methodius further elaborates on this concept: “God, as Scripture says, kills and then gives life, that flesh, after the withering and the death of sin, may, like a temple that is rebuilt, be erected again with the same elements, impassible and immortal, while sin is entirely and definitely destroyed; . . . the very idea of evil will disappear” (De res. 5). “The noble image” of God in humans, mutilated and stained by evil, “will be restored again, intact and perfect, in the same original form . . . because God, in his love for the human being, has not tolerated to leave it in such a condition, that it might not be culpable forever, and might not bear the blame indefinitely, but had it resolve again into its original elements, so that, when God models it again, all defects in it might vanish and disappear” (De res. 6). “In the remodeling, all defects and flaws will disappear, and [the human being] will be made again perfect and pleasant to God” (De res. 7). The resurrection will be a restoration, not only of the body, but also of the soul, liberated from evil:166 “restoration [apokatastasis] into a condition that is free from passions and glorious.”
Salvation will be universal: “God’s mercy entirely dissolves death, assists humanity, and nourishes the light of the heart. . . . While the first laws, promulgated in the day of Adam, Noah, and Moses, did not succeed in giving salvation to all humanity, the law of the gospel, it alone, has saved all [pantas]” (Symp. 10:2).167 Universal restoration and salvation hinges on Christ:
The Logos assumed human nature in order to defeat the serpent and destroy the condemnation that arose with the fall of humanity. It is right that the evil one should be defeated by no one else but the one whom he had deceived . . . because the destruction of sin and of that condemnation would have been impossible unless the same human being to whom it was said, “dust you are and dust you will be again,” had been created anew and the condemnation had been eliminated which, because of that human being, had extended to all. For, “As in Adam all die, so will all be vivified in Christ,” who assumed the nature and stance of Adam. (Symp. 3:6)
The choral hymn of the virgins that concludes Methodius’ Symposium can therefore celebrate universal restoration and salvation as follows:
Corruption has disappeared, and likewise the pains of illnesses that make people shed tears; death has been eliminated; all stupidity has perished; there is no more affliction of the soul which devours, because God’s joy has returned to shine over mortals. Paradise is no longer destitute of mortals. By order of God, it is inhabited again, as it was in the beginning, by that humanity who had fallen from it because of the subtle arts of the serpent, and who is now again incorruptible, fearless, and blessed. (Strophes 21–22)
Humanity will finally be restored to its original condition, free from sin and evil. Methodius has the fall depend on the devil’s deception. Gregory of Nyssa will do the same: Adam and Eve chose evil because it looked good; they were deceived, they produced a false judgment, and this was instilled by the devil. Methodius and Gregory both think that evil is not chosen qua evil, but because it is mistaken for a good. Future purification and instruction will correct that mistake “in the restoration [apokatastasis] of the new aeons” (Symp. 8:11).
In this chapter we have seen that Origen’s influence continued on in his native Egypt—among monks, priests, and others—and further afield, into Palestine and Asia Minor. As a controversial and envied figure he attracted critics, but to start with apokatastasis was not high on the list of issues he was attacked for, and even some of his earliest critics were themselves believers in universal salvation.
151. Jerome, Vir. Ill. 76; Photius, Bibl. Cod. 119.
152. A speech or text in praise of someone.
153. Palladius HL 11;4; 55:3.
154. Spiritual death is a condition of oblivion of one’s true nature; the present heavy body and the inclination to evil have clouded the faculties of the mind; this is why rational creatures “have been unable to discover themselves as they were created, that is, as an eternal substance” (Letter 3; cf. 5).
155. The body, too, will rise as a spiritual body, after the necessary purification taught by the Spirit (Letter 1). Anthony, like Origen, reflects on the meaning of Paul’s description of the resurrected body as a “spiritual body” in 1 Corinthians 15:44. Just as Origen maintained that one’s risen body will keep the same “form” (in the metaphysical sense of “substance,” not in that of “shape”) as one’s earthly body, and not the material ὑποκείμενον/hypokeimenon, which will pass away in that it continually passes away during the present life, so does Anthony state that the risen body will keep one’s “invisible essence/substance,” which will not pass away with the material flesh (Letter 6).
156. Eusebius HE 6:29:4; 6:46:2.
157. See Ramelli and Konstan, Terms for Eternity, 116–29.
158. While this has been sometimes questioned, Gregory’s paternity of this work is very probable thanks to the attestations of Pamphilus—who in his Apology mentioned Gregory as a disciple of Origen and quoted the whole of Gregory’s thanksgiving oration (Socrates HE 4:27)—Eusebius (HE 6:30), Basil, who praises him (De Spir. S. 29:74), Gregory of Nyssa—who wrote his biography/panegyric on the basis of the tradition available in his family, including in it a profession of faith whose original was still preserved in the church of Neocaesarea in his day—and Jerome in Vir. Ill. 65.
159. Basil traces back the Christian faith of their family to her (Ep. 204:6; 210:1; 223:3). Gregory of Nyssa’s venerated sister, Macrina the Younger, was named after her.
160. Basil Ep. 204:6.
161. Origen is the first Christian author for whom ancient scholars composed apologies (Pamphilus and the anonymous cited by Photius Bibl. Cod. 117), an anthology, the Philocalia, and a commentary, that of Didymus on his On First Principles.
162. Eusebius HE 7:32:25.
163. An anonymous apology for Origen in five books summarized by Photius (Bibl. Cod. 117, 91b–92a) is based on Pamphilus’ apology as well as on Dionysius, Clement, Demetrius, and Eusebius. It reports the same eschatological charge against Origen of denying otherworldly punishments. According to Nautin, Origène, 100–153 this Apology represents Books 4 and 5 of Pamphilus’ Apology.
164. Socrates HE 6:13.
165. See Ramelli and Konstan, Terms for Eternity, new ed., 226–27.
166. In De res. 14,
Methodius adduces the same argument for resurrection as Gregory Nyssen brings forth in his dialogue On the Soul and the Resurrection, and his interpretation of the Feast of Tabernacles as a symbol of the resurrection and restoration is very similar to that which Gregory proposes toward the end of the same dialogue: “It means this real tabernacle of ours, which, after falling into sin because of the transgression of the law, and after being broken by sin, will be assembled again according to his promise, and will be resurrected into incorruptibility, that we may really celebrate, in God’s honor, the great and glorious feast of the Tabernacles.” This refers not only to the resurrection of the body, but also to the restoration of the whole human nature.
167. Christ has already begun to save all: “the rule of the evil one, who once enslaved the whole of the human race, was destroyed . . . when Christ became incarnated” (Symp. 10:1).
5
Fourth-century Origenians I