If I understand you correctly, you’re suggesting that the Church somehow forged or manipulated Origen’s writings to make him appear loyal to its authority and open to correction, when in reality he supposedly considered himself above the Church and entitled to correct it rather than the other way around.
Have I understood you correctly?
Because if that’s what you’re suggesting, you’re making a rather extraordinary accusation, and I would certainly expect some equally extraordinary evidence to support it.
Otherwise, you’re essentially accusing the Church of Christ of deliberately falsifying historical documents simply because their contents don’t fit your interpretation. And you you are proposing a deliberately false account of Origen’s thoughts on top of that.
But, since you want the original texts, let’s go through them.
Origen, Homilies on Jeremiah, V, 14 — Original Greek text : “εἰσὶν γε καὶ ἄλλοι λόγοι παρὰ τὸν λόγον τὸν τῆς ἀληθείας, παρὰ τὸν λόγον τὸν τῆς ἐκκλησίας. περιτέμνονται τὰ ἤθη καὶ τὴν καρδίαν ὥς τε εἰπεῖν σωφρονίζουσιν οἱ φιλοσοφοῦντες, σωφρονίζουσιν οἱ ἀπὸ τῶν αἱρέσεων καὶ γίνεται αὐτοῖς περιτομή. ἀλλὰ περιτομὴ μέν, οὐ τῷ θεῷ δέ· περιτομὴ γὰρ λόγῳ ψευδεῖ παρʼ ἐκείνοις γίνεται. ὅταν δὲ κατὰ τὸν ἐκκλησιαστικὸν κανόνα, κατὰ τὴν πρόθεσιν τῆς ὑγιοῦς διδασκαλίας κοινωνικὸς ᾐς, οὐ περιτέτμησαι μόνον, ἀλλὰ περιτέτμησαι »τῷ θεῷ«. »Περιτμήθητε« οὐν τῷ θεῷ ὑμῶν, καὶ περιτέμεσθε τὴν ἀκροβυστίαν τῆς καρδίας ὑμῶν.” *
English translation: “There are indeed other teachings besides the teaching of truth, besides the teaching of the Church. Philosophers, too, circumcise their conduct and their hearts, so to speak, by practicing self-discipline. Those who belong to heretical groups likewise practice self-discipline, and thus a kind of circumcision takes place among them.
Yet this circumcision is not directed toward God, for among them it is accomplished through false teaching. But when you are in communion according to the rule of the Church and the purpose of sound doctrine, you are not merely circumcised; you are circumcised unto God. Therefore, “Be circumcised unto your God, and circumcise the foreskin of your hearts.”
Scholarly reference:
Origen, Homiliae in Ieremiam, V, 14, in Origenes Werke, vol. III, edited by Erich Klostermann, Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller (GCS 6), Leipzig, 1901, pp. 43–44.
Verifiable source: Original Greek text — Origen, Homilies on Jeremiah, V, 14.
Origen distinguishes the teaching of the Church (τὸν λόγον τὸν τῆς ἐκκλησίας) from the teachings of heretical groups. More importantly, he identifies communion according to the ecclesiastical rule (κατὰ τὸν ἐκκλησιαστικὸν κανόνα) and sound doctrine as the condition under which spiritual purification is genuinely directed toward God.
This provides direct textual evidence of the importance Origen attributed to the Church’s doctrinal authority.
If you claim that Origen was a Luther ante-litteram (not in the sense that he proposed the same doctrines proposed by Luther, I’m talking about the attitude towards the Church of Christ and the belief that the individual can correct the Church and shouldn’t submit to her divinely instituted authority), what evidences do you have that back up your claim?
*You can verify the original Greek text here:
Scroll down past the English translation until you find the collapsible section labeled “Greek.” Click on it to expand the section and display the original Greek text.
The passage begins with εἰσὶν γε καὶ ἄλλοι λόγοι and contains Origen’s explicit references to the teaching of the Church and the ecclesiastical rule.
So, dear Shawn, I expect you to provide substantial evidence to back up your claims. Otherwise, you risk exposing yourself as a slanderer and a liar, not merely in the eyes of others, but before God Himself.
And I would imagine that slandering the Church Christ founded isn’t exactly the wisest course of action, spiritually speaking.
Just saying.