I often see Origen and Tertulian called “Church fathers”. However, on a Catholic site, I found a graph showing founders of different churches, and both Origen and Tertulian are mentioned as founders of a chruch: “Tertullianists” and “Origenists”:
allcath.org/Founders.htm
So, did the really split from the Church, and if so, why are they often cited on Catholic Answers? Were they only schismatic or also heretic? What did they teach that differs from what Catholic Church teaches?
In Tertullian’s case, yep. In middle life (about 207) he became attracted to
Montanism (the movement became quite popular in Africa at that time), and seems to have split from the mainstream Church. Accordingly, Tertullian mentioned it and defended it strongly in his later works. Unfortunately his work in defence of it,
De Ecstasi, in 7 books is lost. Tertullian fiercely attacked those who condemned the ‘new prophecy’ and Church authorities, claiming they are more interested in their own political power in the Church than in listening to the Spirit.
In the time of St. Augustine (about the late 4th century), a group known as the “Tertullianists” (
Tertullianistae) attracted rapid conversions in Rome and owned a basilica in Carthage, which in that same period passed into the orthodox Church. Soon, however, the group vanished again.
We have no other information about them; it is unknown whether they were merely another name for the African branch of the Montanists, or whether this means that Tertullian later split with the Montanists and founded his own group (as Augustine and the anonymous author of
Praedestinatorum Haeresis claim), or was merely a Tertullian fanclub of sorts with only tenuous connections to Montanism.
Origen’s case is a bit more tricky, as he was only condemned after his death due to some of his (or his followers’) more controversial teachings. For quite some time, he was counted as one of the most important church fathers and his works were widely used in the Church. His exegetical method was standard of the School of Alexandria and the Origenists were an important party in the 4th century debates on Arianism.
Sts. Basil the Great and Gregory of Nazianzus, e.g., compiled in their first monastery the
Philokalia, a collection of Origen’s work, though both of them did neither adopt Origenism nor use the Alexandrian allegoric exegesis.
Much later, Origen posthumously got into theological trouble with the Church because of some extreme views adopted by his followers, the Origenists, whose views were attributed to Origen. In the course of this controversy, some of his other teachings came up, which were not accepted by the general church consensus. Among these were the preexistence of souls, universal salvation and a hierarchical concept of the Trinity. These teachings, and some of his followers’ more extreme views, were declared anathema by a local council in Constantinople 545, and then an ecumenical council (Fifth Ecumenical Council) pronounced
15 anathemas against Origen in 553.
As a result of this condemnation, the writings of Origen supporting his teachings in these areas were destroyed. They were either outright destroyed, or they were translated with the appropriate adjustments to eliminate conflict with orthodox Christianity. Therefore, little direct evidence remains to fully confirm or disprove Origen’s support of the nine points of anathema against him.
Origen and a form of
apocatastasis (the ultimate reconciliation of good and evil, where all moral creatures – angels, humans and devils - will eventually come to a harmony in God’s kingdom, the evil ones through repentance and rejection of evil) were condemned in 544 by the Patriarch Mennas of Constantinople and the condemnation was ratified in 553 by the Fifth Ecumenical Council. Many heteroclite views became associated with Origen, and the 15 anathemas against him attributed to the council condemn a form of apocatastasis along with the pre-existence of the soul, animism (a heterodox Christology), and a denial of real and lasting resurrection of the body. Some authorities believe these anathemas belong to an earlier local synod.
It should also be noted, the Fifth Ecumenical Council has been contested as being an official and authorized Ecumenical Council, as it was established not by the Pope, but the Emperor Justinian because of the Pope’s resistance to it. It should also be noted that the Fifth Ecumenical Council addressed what was called “The Three Chapters” and was against a form of Origenism which truly had nothing to do with Origen and Origenist views. In fact, Popes Vigilius, Pelagius I (556-61), Pelagius II (579-90), and Gregory the Great (590-604) were only aware the Fifth Council specifically dealt with the Three Chapters and make no mention of Origenism or Universalism, nor spoke as if they knew of its condemnation even though Gregory the Great was opposed to the belief of universalism.
