Fons christianitatis assyriacae ac chaldeicae

In the modern church history, many researchers find some kind of anti-Origenism in Theodore’s works and consider it as the main reason which stimulated the pro-Origenist party and chiefly Theodore Askedas to attack Theofore’s memory 125 years after his death. One could encounter such views practically in all the research studies on Church History and History of Dogma, which are dealing with this epoch. The main objective of the present contribution is to express a view that goes into the opposite direction, namely, that Theodore was not a mere anti-Origenist, rather he was a representative of a broader theological perspective including a specific Christian anthropology and understanding of salvation, a perspective that happens to be somewhat similar to that of Origen. The adoption of this view allows interpreting the simultaneous condemnation of both, Theodore and Origen, in a different way. The basis for the condemnation of Theodore is not his anti-Origenism but the inconsistency of his theological vision with the salvific implications of Chalcedonian dogma (451). In this way, it appears to be possible to consider Theodore of Mopsuestia and Origen as sharing a common theological understanding of human condition and salvation. However, before focusing on Theodore we should begin with the discussion of a specific tendency in some 2nd century Christian writers.