writers of the third century, thus testifies of Origen: "that he was the most eminent of these, whether we consider the extent of his fame, or the multiplicity of his labors; that he was a man of vast and uncommon abilities, and the greatest luminary of the Christian world, which this age exhibited to view"-and "had the justness of his judgment been equal to the immensity of his genius, the fervor of his piety, his indefatigable patience, his extensive erudition, and his other eminent and superior talents; all encomiums must have fallen short of his merits. Yet, such as he was, his virtues and his labours deserve the admira tion of all ages, and his name will be transmitted with honor through the annals of time, as long as learning and genius shall be esteemed among men."

66

The Rev. Dr. Maclaine, in a note corrective of a paragraph accusing Origen as the head of a speculative tribe, who were desirous of bringing the doctrines of celestial wisdom into a certain subjection to the precepts of their Philosophy, &c. says, among the errors attributed to this great man, and which gave most offence were, 1. that in the Trinity, the Father was greater than the Son, and the Son, than the Holy Ghost. 2. The pre-existence of souls, which he considered as sent into mortal bodies, for the punishment of sins committed in a former state of being. 3. That the soul of Christ was united to the Word before the incarnation. 4. That the sun, moon, stars, &c. were animated and endowed with rational souls. 5. That after the resurrection, all bodies will be of a round figure. 6. That the torments of the damned will have an end; and that as Christ had been crucified in this world to save mankind, he is to be crucified in the next to save devils.†

These articles are said to have been charged, together with others of less import against Origen, by the Council of Constantinople. The first article is unqestionably a forgery, as will be hereafter seen, when we come to treat of the Confession of Faith of these early Fathers respec

tively. The Rev. Dr. Middleton has also accused him of favoring the superstitions of the age in which he lived, and his writings on that account have been rejected by many as "fanciful." We do not pretend to deny, that even the profoundly learned Origen, was tinctured in some degree with the superstitions of the age in which he lived and was educated; but we have it on the same authority that classed him among the credulous and superstitious writers of the third century, that he was least of all tinctured with these weaknesses of any writer.‡

To reject his authority therefore, only because he gave his sanction to the superstitions of his predecessors and contemporary authors, and in some instances, yielded to the influence of opinions purely hypothetical; while on the fundamental and essential doctrines of Christianity, his writings not only bear the broad stamp of Orthodoxy, and have for centuries withstood the repeated "denunciations of Priests, and of the thunders of Synods and Councils," as also the prohibitory edicts of Emperors; would be in fact something like rejecting gold, because it was not separated from its ore.

It has been made clearly to appear, from the writings of Dr. Mosheim, that the principal cause of the grievous persecutions of this great man, and his doctrines, originated in the jealousies and envy of a few factious and less gifted Bishops, among whom Demetrius, a Presbyter of Alexandria may be considered as the ringleader. Origen was ordained a Presbyter of Alexandria, by the laying on of the hands of the Bishops of Cæsaria and Jerusalem, some time in the year 210. We have already seen, that so great was his fame as a scholar and divine, that his company and conversation was eagerly sought after by Emperors, Empresses and Kings. His method of translating the Scriptures became popular, so much so, "that the Christian doctors who applied themselves to the study of letters and philosophy interpreted the

Dr. Middleton's Free Inquiry, p. 14, 16. For his doctrine and tenets, see Miss H. Adams' Dictionary of all Religions, art. "Origen ists."

Scriptures after the method of Origen, whose method was almost universal in the fourth century. In the fifth century the greatest part of commentators, both Greek and Latin followed the doctrine and method of Origen."

"*

We need not wonder therefore, at the envy and jealousies of his factious enemies; the dispositions of men, in all ages and in all countries, are nearly the same, and we are justified in believing, that thus they will continue while the minds of men remain carnal; and it is with real regret we are constrained to say, that even in this enlightened age and in this happy country; which secures by its valued constitution, civil and religious liberty to all men, and to all sects of Christians, we still discover a disposition among professing Christians; not more favorable to the principles of toleration than that manifested by the enemies of the illustrious Origen.

Irenæus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Minutius and Hypollitus, were the contemporaries and friends of Origen. The first named Father in his "Apostolic traditions, lib. ii. ch. 39." declares as Apostolic and Orthodox, the faith of the church from its commencement to be, "that Christ came to save all men of all ranks and degrees." Hypollitus who was esteemed one of the most celebrated authors, but whose works are lost, suffered martyrdom for his faith, as also did Leonidas, the Father of Origen. Dionysus, Bishop of Alexandria, who was called, by way of eminence, the Great; Theognostus a writer of note, and Eusebius, Bishop of Cæsaria, were the warm friends of Origen and the advocates and espousers of the Universal doctrine, and when Demetrius arrayed his party against Origen, under the specious pretext of attacking the errors of that great man; but in truth, to indulge and gratify his envy and spleen; the Bishops of Achaia, Palestine, Phoenecia and Arabia, espoused his cause against Demetrius and his party.

* Benedict's Hist. of all Religions, pp. 241. See also, an account of the "Syrian Churches," in Miss Adams' Dictionary of all Religions.

Dr. Mosheim says, the advocates of Origen in that, and the succeeding ages, that is, such as preferred his interpretation of the Scriptures, and were hence Universalists, were prodigious; and that in the fourth century the name of Origen was held by the most part of Christians in the highest veneration. John, Bishop of Jerusalem, defended the sentiments and reputation of Origen with great ability, and Rufinus, Presbyter of Aquilia, was an advocate for this doctrine and translated several of the books of Origen into Latin. In the fifth century, as we have already seen, this doctrine was advocated by "the greatest part of Greek and Latin commentators," and the state of Universalism in the sixth century may be easily imagined, says Mr. Benedict, by the following quotation from Dr. Mosheim, making suitable allowances for his strong aversion to this doctrine.*

"Though the credit of Origen and his system seemed to be expiring under the blows it had received from the Orthodox, and the repeated thunders of Synods and councils, yet it was very far from being totally sunk. On the contrary, this great man and his doctrine, were held by many, and especially by the monks in the highest veneration, and cherished with a kind of enthusiasm which became boundless and extravagant. In the West, Bellator translated the works of Origen into the Latin language. In the Provinces and particularly in Syria and Palestine, which were the principal seats of Origenism, (i. e. Universalism.) The Monks, seconded by several Bishops, and chiefly by Theodore, Bishop of Cæsaria, in Cappadocia, defended the truth and the authority of the doctrines of Origen against all his adversaries, with incredible vehemence and contention."

"After undergoing various persecutions, denunciations and prohibitions, in the reign of the Emperor Justinian, an edict of condemnation addressed to Mennas, Patriarch of Constantinople, was passed against Origen and his

*The Rev. Dr. Maclaine, the editor of Mosheim's Eccl. Hist. also censures him in several instances for the inaccuracies of his statements and his prejudices against other sects of Christians.

doctrine, ordering its entire suppression. This prohibition, though it tended in some measure to retard the ap parent progress of this faith, it was again revived in Palestine, during or soon after the breaking out of the controversy concerning the three chapters, writings of Theodore, Theodoret and Cyril, recovering new vigor and spreading itself far and wide. Hence, many commotions were raised in the Church, which were however terminated by the fifth general Council of Constantinople, by Justinian, A. D. 533, and in which, Origen and his followers were condemned."

*

But notwithstanding this edict of condemnation, "Theodore, Bishop of Cæsaria, who was attached to this doctrine, so managed affairs as to give repose to the followers of Origen, who were more or less numerous, under different narnes, to the close of the twelfth century. Doubtless, the Universalist Bishop of Cæsaria, perceiving the policy of the enemies to his faith, and perceiving also the increase of the power of the Romans, and their aim at superiority, both in civil and ecclesiastical authority, deemed it most prudent to evade the blow aimed at the Primitive Patriarchal Church, by a counter policy, and hence, yielding to a compromise with the Council of opposing Bishops, that the followers of Origen should assume a new name, and be no longer recognized as Origenists, but submit themselves to the authority of the now dominant Church and its rulers.

The Eastern, or Greek Church, was governed by Patriarchs, whereas, the Western, or Latin Church, was governed as yet only by Bishops. To the haughty Roman, this superiority was intolerable; and as they could not tamely submit to any thing like superiority in their political, so neither could they endure the idea of superiority in their ecclesiastical provinces. A regard, however, to the Christian name and profession, held them within a certain restraint; but they were nevertheless inwardly thirsting with the desire of universal dominion, both of Church and State; and this they obtained in the beginning of the seventh century.

* Benedict's History of all Religions, pp. 243.