Was this teaching (of soul existing before a birth) condemned by the Church?

Upvote:0

One of the earlier users of the site called me out on this, she called it preexistence. I don't think its right to lump it in to Origenism and call it Origenism any more than calling belief in consubstantiation Lutheranism. But i think you could call denial of the Theotokos, Nestorianism because that's all we remember that he got wrong (although I think that's a pretty naive thing to say, but I'm just painting a picture here).

In any event, our souls are created with our bodies in our mothers womb. How God knew us before He knit us up in there is His business.

Upvote:5

Sounds like you are referring to the idea of the pre-existence of souls. This idea is lumped with "Origenism". Check this thread out here: What is " Origenism"

This is an excerpt from orthodoxwiki.org/Apocatastasis:

The anathemas of the local Council of Constantinople in 453, which is understood by most commentators to be confirmed by the Fifth Ecumenical Council in 553, posthumously excommunicated Origen and anyone following specific points of his teachings. These anathemas condemned his protology of pre-existent souls and his eschatology of universal restoration of all things "which follows from" his protology:

If anyone asserts the fabulous pre-existence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it: let him be anathema. (First anathema against Origen)

More post

Search Posts

Related post