Second Council of Constantinople (553) – anathema 9 against the apocatastasis of Origen (Mansi vol. 9)

The Second Council of Constantinople (553), the Fifth Ecumenical Council

Background and Condemnation of Origen’s Doctrine

The Second Council of Constantinople, the fifth Ecumenical Council, convened in 553 under the presidency of Emperor Justinian I. It solemnly condemned the doctrine of *apocatastasis* (final restoration) taught by Origen (3rd century) and his followers, which held that even Satan and demons would ultimately be saved. This condemnation dogmatically established the irreversibility of the fall of angels. The text is found in Mansi’s *Sacrorum Conciliorum* vol. 9, col. 396ss.

Key Details of the Council:

– Council: Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (Fifth Ecumenical Council) – Convoker: Emperor Justinian I – President: Patriarch Eutychius of Constantinople – Dates: May 5, June 2, 553 – Anti-Origenist Anathemas: 15 anathemas against Origen’s teachings (from Mansi vol. 9, col. 396-426: Denzinger-Schoenmetzer 433-435)

Origins and Apocatastasis

Origen of Alexandria (185-253), a prominent theologian of the early Church, developed in his work *Peri Archon* (On Principles) the doctrine of apocatastasis, from the Greek *apokatastasis*, meaning “restoration.” According to this view:1. All spiritual creatures were initially created equal. 2. The diversity among angels, humans, and demons arises from pre-existent free choices. 3. Through continuous education by God, all will eventually reach God. 4. Even Satan and demons will be restored to their original goodness one day.This position displays God’s “immense mercy” but carries significant implications: it denies eternal punishment, diminishes the significance of the Cross as a definitive event, and may lead to moral relativism.

The Tenth Anathema (Anti-Origenist Anathemas)

Latin Text of Anathema 9:

> “Si quis dixerit aut senserit, omnium impiorum hominum et daemonum punitionem temporariam fore, et ab ea finem illi habituram esse, hoc est, restitutionem futuram daemonum vel impiorum hominum: anathema sit.”

Portuguese Translation of Anathema 9:

> “Se alguém afirmar ou pensar que o castigo de todos os homens ímpios e dos demónios será temporário e que dele haverá um fim, isto é, que haverá uma restauração dos demónios ou dos homens ímpios: seja anátema.”

The 15 Anti-Origenist Anathemas

The 15 anathemas of the Second Council of Constantinople (553) against Origen’s teachings include various statements refuting his views on the restoration of demons and sinners.

Table: Condemned Doctrines (Anatema)

| Number | Condemned Doctrine | |—|—| | 1 | Pre-existence of souls | | 2 | Pre-existence of angels as equal souls to men | | 3 | Christ was an incarnated angel | | 4 | Human bodies will be ethereal in resurrection | | 5 | Heaven, the sun, and the moon are rational animated creatures | | 6 | Men will become angels | | 7 | The end will be identical to the beginning | | 8 | Christ would be worshiped by preternatural “angels” | | 9 | Apocatastasis: Temporary punishment of Satan and the impious | | 10 | Christ would crucify himself in ethereal regions to save angels | | 11-15 | Corollary errors about the body-soul relationship and resurrection |

Implications for Demonology

Anatema 9 dogmatically establishes:– The irrevocable fall of angels: Demons will not be saved, they are definitively lost. – Eternal hell: Not a temporary state of purification for all. – Definitive freedom of spirits: The angelic choice determines eternal fate. – Divine justice and mercy: God respects the free choice of spiritual creatures.

Magisterial Continuity

Anatema 9 from the Second Council of Constantinople was reaffirmed by:– St. John Damascene (8th century): “There is no repentance for angels after their fall” (De Fide Orthodoxa II, 4), cited in CCC 393. – Fourth Latin Council (1215): “For Satan and other demons were created by God as good by nature, but they themselves became evil” – implying irreversibility. – Florence Council (1442): Reaffirmed the definition. – St. Thomas Aquinas: “The will of an angel, by its very nature, adheres immovably to what it chose” (ST I, q. 64, a. 2), see post on Thomas. – CCC 393: “The irrevocable character of the angel’s choice, and not a lack in divine mercy, is what makes the sin of angels unforgivable.”

Hans Urs von Balthasar and Universal ‘Hoping’

In the 20th century, theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar (1905-1988) proposed in *Was dürfen wir hoffen?* (1986) that we can “hope” for the salvation of all without affirming apocatastasis as dogma. This view sparked controversy. Official interpretation:– Cannot affirm that all will be saved (against Anatema 9 of Constantinople II). – Can hope and pray for the salvation of all men. – Active apocatastasis (claiming all will indeed be saved) is heretical. – Passive hoping (praying humbly for conversion of all) is legitimate.But in the case of demons, the position is clear: they are definitely lost. Balthasar’s hope refers to condemned men, not demons.

Soteriological Implications

Anatema 9 has profound consequences for Catholic soteriology:– Christ did not save demons: “for He took human nature, not angelic” (Heb 2:16) – Exorcism does not “convert” Satan; it only expels him – Hell is a real and eternal state for both demons and the wicked – Infinite mercy of God respects definitive freedom

Additional Reading

– IV Council of Lateran 1215 | Florence Cantate Domino 1442 | St. Thomas, Angels’ Treaty (Summa Theologica 50-64) | Catholic Catechism on Angels and Demons | CDF Faith and Demonology

Also see: What is Angeology? Angels in the Bible and in the Magisterium