Reincarnation in early Christianity

“In the first five hundred years of Christianity, reincarnation was 
most certainly on the main stage. It was a prominent and well-
respected merchant in the bazaar of Christian theology.

A significant number of early church pillars such as St. Augustine, 
Clement of Alexandria, St. Gregory of Nyssa, Justin Martyr, and St. 
Jerome believed in the doctrine of reincarnation. In his Confessions, 
St. Augustine ponders the common sense viability of reincarnation: 
Did my infancy succeed another age of mine that dies before it? Was 
it that which I spent within my mother's womb? . . . And what before 
that life again, O God of my joy, was I anywhere or in any body? 
Confessions of St. Augustine, Edward Pusey, translator, Book I.
There is one early church father who is the central figure in this 
complex story of intrigue and deception. According to the 
Encyclopedia Britannica, Origen (C.E. 185-254) was the most 
prominent, most distinguished and most influential of the early 
church fathers. We would do well to consider the enormity of this 
statement. The Encyclopedia Britannica also declares that he was the 
most prolific writer and theologian of early Christianity with works 
numbering around 6,000. St. Jerome asks, "Which of us can read all 
that he has written?" It is important to understand that Origen's 
story, is not about the trials and tribulations of an obscure 
backwoods rogue theologian. How such an important and prominent 
luminary receded into the blackness of obscurity is a fascinating 
story and underscores the ego's perennial effort to have its own way.

The Encyclopedia Britannica describes Origen as both a Neo-Platonist 
and a Gnostic. Socrates and Plato were arguably the most important 
bearers of the doctrine of reincarnation to the Western world. The 
first clear presentation of reincarnation by these two is in Plato's 
Meno and later in the Phaedo where the concept is fully articulated. 
In the Phaedo, Socrates (under the pen of Plato) goes to great 
lengths to explain the philosophy proposing that the soul is immortal 
and does not cease to exist when the body expires. In Plato's 
Republic, the character Er describes the after death journey of the 
soul in graphic detail before "coming back." These ideas are expanded 
in the Timaeus and the Phaedrus in which Socrates presents 
reincarnation in the strongest terms. 

Aristotle emphasized a more empirical materialism which focused on 
the here-and-now; the observable. It should be pointed out that 
through the centuries many philosophers have strongly disagreed with 
Aristotle's "logic of categories" axiom which proposes a tidy 
compartmentalization of all aspects of existence both cosmic and 
human. This theory supposes no overlapping connection of the various 
categories of knowledge such as science, history and religion. Thomas 
Aquinas, who played a large role in shaping Christianity as we know 
it today, based his entire view of life on Aristotelian logic thus 
abandoning the mystical experiential traditions altogether. In this 
light we can understand more clearly the Encyclopedia Britannica's 
categorization of Origen as a Neo-Platonist with a decidedly Gnostic 
flavor. The Gnostics, as described earlier, believed that truth could 
be gained only through "Gnosis" or direct experience of God. They 
emphasized ecstatic communion and the inward path toward God. About 
reincarnation, Origen has this to say: 

If it can be shown that an incorporeal and reasonable being has life 
in itself independently of the body and that it is worse off in the 
body than out of it, then beyond a doubt bodies are only of secondary 
importance and arise from time to time to meet the varying conditions 
of reasonable creatures. Those who require bodies are clothed with 
them, and contrawise, when fallen souls have lifted themselves up to 
better things their bodies are once more annihilated. They are thus 
ever vanishing and ever reappearing. Origen, from A Select Library of 
the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, P. Schaff 
and H. Wace editors

By some inclination toward evil, certain spirit souls come into 
bodies, first of men; then, due to their association with the 
irrational passions after the allotted span of human life, they are 
changed into beasts, from which they sink to the level of plants. 
From this condition they rise again through the same stages and are 
restored to their heavenly place. Origen, On First Principles, B. W. 
Butterworth, translator.

As with many great saints of the past, there was nothing lukewarm 
about Origen. While his supporters were passionate in heralding his 
views, his detractors passionately pursued his destruction. Origen 
was banished forever from official church recognition at the Second 
Council of Constantinople (the Fifth Ecumenical Council) amidst a 
back drop of swirling political intrigue and dissension that was so 
severe it leaves many students of the event to question whether or 
not Christians are bound by the edicts and anathemas that were 
adopted there.

Emperor Justinian wrote a letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople 
naming Origen as one of the pernicious heretics. To be a heretic is 
bad enough but pernicious means "1. insidious harm or ruin; 2. deadly 
or fatal." In other words, there are no human beings worse than this. 
Justinian then convened a synod at Constantinople in 543 C.E. which 
issued an edict refuting Origen. Pope Vigilius opposed the edict and 
promptly suspended all communication with the Patriarch of 
Constantinople. When the Pope arrived in Constantinople he reversed 
himself issuing a document supporting the Justinian edict. Many 
speculate that this document was issued at the gunpoint of intense 
political pressure. These speculations are confirmed by the fact that 
Pope Vigilius withdrew the document seven years later in 550 C.E. 
After much rancorous discussion and many maneuvers, Justinian called 
for a meeting of the entire Church in 553 C.E. known as the Fifth 
Ecumenical Council or the Second Council of Constantinople. The 
Church was geographically divided into East and West with these lines 
of division also extending into religious and philosophical matters. 
In general, the West was supportive of Origen while the East was not. 
Justinian himself presided over the meeting because Pope Vigilius had 
boycotted the gathering as an act of protest over irregularities such 
as stacking the arrangements for attendance against the West. It was 
highly irregular for Justinian and not the Pope to preside over this 
conclave. Of the 165 bishops who signed the acts of the Council not 
more than six were from the West because they were not in attendance. 
Let us recap for emphasis. The Pope refused to attend, Justinian ran 
the meeting and half of the bishops, the ones most likely to support 
Origen, did not attend the Council meeting. 

In the long run, Pope Vigilius accepted the Council but the West did 
not recognize the Council as legitimate for some time. Several 
Western dioceses even broke off communication with Rome. Milan was so 
righteously indignant over this blatant skewering of propriety that 
they did not rejoin Rome until the end of the sixth century. To add 
to the vagary of Origen's demise, it should be noted that in the end 
of the Fifth Ecumenical Council's fourteen anathemas, Origen's name 
is mentioned in only one of them nestled in a list of heretics. There 
is some evidence that even this was an error. The tragedy is that 
Christians have been led to believe that the doctrine of 
reincarnation has never been part of Christian faith. Others have 
supposed that the question of reincarnation was forever closed at the 
Fifth Ecumenical Council.

To further clarify the picture of Origen's crucifixion, it is 
important to understand his principle antagonist, emperor Justinian. 
The Encyclopedia Britannica has interesting things to say about him. 
The truth seems to be that Justinian was not a great ruler in the 
higher sense of the word, that is to say, a man of large views, deep 
insight...

Justinian was quick rather than strong or profound; his policy does 
not strike one as the result of deliberate and well-considered views, 
but dictated by the hopes and fancies of the moment.
In contrast, no previous ruler had taken such an interest in church 
policy as did Justinian. In what way is a man who is a shallow-minded 
opportunist (to summarize the Encyclopedia Britannica's 
characterization) interested in deeper spiritual matters? This 
question has left many to speculate that Justinian saw the Church as 
a means of control and exploitation with the whip being his "one life 
then heaven or hell" policy.

While Justinian is portrayed as soft and indecisive, his wife the 
empress Theodora, was an indomitable freight train of decisiveness 
and strength. It should be clearly understood that she was not merely 
his consort but was empress regnant which means she had the legal 
right to interfere and run the empire. Officials took an oath to her 
as well as to Justinian. In the great Nika insurrection of 532, her 
courage alone saved her husband from being overthrown.

According to Procopius the historian, Theodora was the daughter of a 
bear feeder of the amphitheater at Constantinople, and she began 
working as an actress (regarded as an extremely low vocation) while 
still a child. Later she became a well-known courtesan and eventually 
met Justinian in Constantinople. Justinian's aunt, who was the 
empress at the time, forbade the marriage but upon her death 
Justinian repealed a law which prohibited senators from marrying 
women of the stage. In 527, at the death of Justinian's uncle the 
emperor Justin, Justinian and Theodora became rulers of the Roman 
Empire. He was forty-four and she was twenty-four.

According to Procopius as written in the Encyclopedia Britannica, 
"She surrounded herself with ceremonious pomp, and required all who 
approached to abase themselves in a manner new even to that half-
Oriental court. She constituted herself the protectress of faithless 
wives against outraged husbands, yet professed great zeal for the 
moral reformation of the city, enforcing severely the laws against 
vice, and confining five hundred courtesans, whom she had swept out 
of the streets of the capital, in a "house of repentance" on the 
Asiatic side of the Bosphous strait. Procopius portrays her as acting 
with the greatest cruelties. The Encyclopedia Britannica goes on to 
state that we are able to gather from other writers that Theodora was 
indeed extremely harsh and tyrannical. 

The following is an excerpt from the Anecdota by Procopius describing 
Justinian. I think this is as good a time as any to describe the 
personal appearance of the man. Now in physique he was neither tall 
nor short, but of average height; not thin, but moderately plump; his 
face was round, and not bad looking, for he had good color, even when 
he fasted for two days. To make a long description short, he much 
resembled Domitian, Vespasian's son.... 

Now such was Justinian in appearance; but his character was something 
I could not fully describe. For he was at once villainous and 
amenable; as people say colloquially, a moron. He was never truthful 
with anyone, but always guileful in what he said and did, yet easily 
hoodwinked by any who wanted to deceive him. His nature was an 
unnatural mixture of folly and wickedness. What in olden times a 
peripatetic philosopher said was also true of him, that opposite 
qualities combine in a man as in the mixing of colors. I will try to 
portray him, however, insofar as I can fathom his complexity. 

This Emperor, then, was deceitful, devious, false, hypocritical, two-
faced, cruel, skilled in dissembling his thought, never moved to 
tears by either joy or pain, though he could summon them artfully at 
will when the occasion demanded, a liar always, not only offhand, but 
in writing, and when he swore sacred oaths to his subjects in their 
very hearing. Then he would immediately break his agreements and 
pledges, like the vilest of slaves, whom indeed only the fear of 
torture drives to confess their perjury. A faithless friend, he was a 
treacherous enemy, insane for murder and plunder, quarrelsome and 
revolutionary, easily led to anything, but never willing to listen to 
good counsel, quick to plan mischief and carry it out, but finding 
even the hearing of anything good distasteful to his ears. 

How could anyone put Justinian's ways into words? These and many even 
worse vices were disclosed in him as in no other mortal: nature 
seemed to have taken the wickedness of all other men combined and 
planted it in this man's soul. And besides this, he was too prone to 
listen to accusations; and too quick to punish. For he decided such 
cases without full examination, naming the punishment when he had 
heard only the accuser's side of the matter. Without hesitation he 
wrote decrees for the plundering of countries, sacking of cities, and 
slavery of whole nations, for no cause whatever. So that if one 
wished to take all the calamities which had befallen the Romans 
before this time and weigh them against his crimes, I think it would 
be found that more men had been murdered by this single man than in 
all previous history. 

He had no scruples about appropriating other people's property, and 
did not even think any excuse necessary, legal or illegal, for 
confiscating what did not belong to him. And when it was his, he was 
more than ready to squander it in insane display, or give it as an 
unnecessary bribe to the barbarians. In short, he neither held on to 
any money himself nor let anyone else keep any: as if his reason were 
not avarice, but jealousy of those who had riches. Driving all wealth 
from the country of the Romans in this manner, he became the cause of 
universal poverty. 

Now this was the character of Justinian, so far as I can portray it. 

Translated by Richard Atwater, in Procopius, Secret History, 
(Chicago: P. Covicii; New York: Covicii Friedal, 1927), reprinted by 
University of Michigan Press, 1961

The historian Procopius, who wrote the above narrative, was appointed 
secretary to General Belisarius in 527 C.E. The General was 
Justinian's right-hand man and personal confidant. Procopius also 
wrote the well known Histories in eight books, the Buildings of 
Justinian in six books and the Anecdota. For obvious reasons, the 
Anecdota was not published until after the death of Procopius. As a 
historian and chronicler of Justinian and his court, he was 
constrained to write only positive accounts while everyone concerned 
was still alive. Secretly he wrote the Anecdota to expose the utter 
immorality and disregard for decency expressed in the lives of 
Justinian and Theodora. The Encyclopedia Britannica says: 

Owing to the ferocity and brutality of the attacks upon Justinian, 
the authenticity of the Anecdota has been called in question, but the 
claims of Procopius to the authorship are now generally recognized.
In other words, the Anecdota reflected so badly on Justinian and 
Theodora that it was difficult to believe it could be true. It is not 
the intent of this book to serve as an indictment of these two souls -
 may they find peace and love wherever they are. The information 
about Justinian and Theodora and the demise of Origen is printed here 
as an aid to understanding that the fortunes of the Holy Scriptures 
and Christian doctrine in general have not always been in the hands 
of God's servants. The removal of the doctrine of reincarnation may 
not have been God's doing. God may have originated or inspired the 
scriptures that we have now accepted to be Christian but since then, 
they have, on occasion, been placed in the hands of those with little 
understanding. Because of this, we should abandon the expectation 
that these scriptures would arrive in the twenty-first century 
unscathed. 

The doctrine of reincarnation was banished because it gives power and 
authority to the people. Reincarnation contradicted the aspirations 
of a few bishops and deacons who felt they alone should dispense the 
truth to the multitudes. This authoritarian strangle-hold is 
strengthened by the doctrine of "one chance-one life" because a 
person who wrongly chose to think for themselves, dismissing the 
authority of the hierarchy, would not get another chance to put 
things aright if they guessed wrongly. The position of the hierarchy 
is that eternal damnation without parole would be the irrevocable 
fate of those who dared to question the hierarchy's authority.”

REINCARNATION IN EARLY CHRISTIANITY
http://www.reincarnation.ws/reincarnation_in_early_christianity.html