Editing Origen (section)

===Alleged self-castration===
{{multiple image
| align             = right
| direction         = horizontal
| footer            = Eusebius claims in his ''Ecclesiastical History'' that, as a young man, Origen secretly paid a physician to surgically [[castration|castrate]] him, a claim which affected Origen's reputation for centuries,{{sfn|McGuckin|2004|pp=6, 13–14}} as demonstrated by these fifteenth-century depictions of Origen castrating himself.
| width             = <!-- Image 1 -->
| image1            = Origen emasculating himself (MS. Douce 195).jpg
| width1            = 300
<!-- Image 2 -->| image2            = A-depiction-of-Origens-self-castration.jpg
| width2            = 150
}}

Eusebius claims that, as a young man, following a literal reading of Matthew 19:12, in which Jesus is presented as saying "there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuch for the sake of the [[Kingdom of Heaven (Gospel of Matthew)|kingdom of heaven]]",<ref>{{bibleverse|Matthew|19:12}}</ref> Origen either [[castration|castrated]] himself or had someone else castrate him in order to ensure his reputation as a respectable tutor to young men and women.{{sfn|McGuckin|2004|p=6}}{{sfn|Trigg|1983|p=53}}<ref>Eusebius, ''Historia Ecclesiastica'' VI.8</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://image.ox.ac.uk/images/bodleian/msdouce195/122v.jpg |title=Digital Bodleian<!-- Bot generated title --> |access-date=2016-02-23 |archive-date=2017-05-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170510170231/http://image.ox.ac.uk/images/bodleian/msdouce195/122v.jpg |url-status=live }}</ref> Eusebius further alleges that Origen privately told Demetrius, the bishop of Alexandria, about the castration and that Demetrius initially praised him for his devotion to God on account of it.{{sfn|McGuckin|2004|p=6}} 

Origen, however, never mentions anything about having castrated himself in any of his surviving writings.{{sfn|McGuckin|2004|p=6}}{{sfn|Trigg|1983|p=54}} In his explanation of this verse in his ''Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew'', written near the end of life, he strongly condemns any literal interpretation of Matthew 19:12,{{sfn|McGuckin|2004|p=6}} asserting that only an idiot would interpret the passage as advocating literal castration.{{sfn|McGuckin|2004|p=6}}

{{Origenism}}

Since the beginning of the twentieth century, some scholars have questioned the historicity of Origen's self-castration, with many seeing it as a wholesale fabrication.<ref>{{Cite journal |first=Shawn W. J. |last=Keough |year=2008 |volume=03 |issue=30 |title=Christoph Markschies, ''Origenes und sein Erbe: Gesammelte Studien. Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 160'' |journal=Bryn Mawr Classical Review |url=http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2008/2008-03-30.html |access-date=2009-01-25 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080608123250/http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2008/2008-03-30.html |archive-date=2008-06-08 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="Origen and Origenism">{{cite CE1913 |last=Prat |first=Ferdinand |wstitle=Origen and Origenism |volume=11}}</ref> Trigg states that Eusebius's account of Origen's self-castration is certainly true, because Eusebius, who was an ardent admirer of Origen, yet clearly describes the castration as an act of pure folly, [[Criterion of embarrassment|would have had no motive]] to pass on a piece of information that might tarnish Origen's reputation unless it was "notorious and beyond question".{{sfn|Trigg|1983|p=53}} Trigg sees Origen's condemnation of the literal interpretation of Matthew 19:12 as him "tacitly repudiating the literalistic reading he had acted on in his youth".{{sfn|Trigg|1983|p=53}}

In sharp contrast, McGuckin dismisses Eusebius's story of Origen's self-castration as "hardly credible", seeing it as a deliberate attempt by Eusebius to distract from more serious questions regarding the orthodoxy of Origen's teachings.{{sfn|McGuckin|2004|p=6}} McGuckin also states: "We have no indication that the motive of castration for respectability was ever regarded as standard by a teacher of mixed-gender classes."{{sfn|McGuckin|2004|p=6}} He adds that Origen's female students (whom Eusebius lists by name) would have been accompanied by attendants at all times, meaning that Origen would have had no good reason to think that anyone would suspect him of impropriety.{{sfn|McGuckin|2004|p=6}} 

[[Henry Chadwick (theologian)|Henry Chadwick]] argues that, while Eusebius's story may be true, it seems unlikely, given that Origen's exposition of Matthew 19:12 "strongly deplored any literal interpretation of the words".{{sfn|Chadwick|1993|pp=108–109}} Instead, Chadwick suggests, "Perhaps Eusebius was uncritically reporting malicious gossip retailed by Origen's enemies, of whom there were many."{{sfn|Chadwick|1993|pp=108–109}} However, many noted historians, such as [[Peter Brown (historian)|Peter Brown]] and [[William Placher]], continue to find no reason to conclude that the story is false.<ref name="Platcher">[[William Placher]], ''A History of Christian Theology: An Introduction'', (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1983), p. 62.</ref> Placher theorizes that, if it is true, it may have followed an episode in which Origen received some raised eyebrows while privately tutoring a woman.<ref name="Platcher" />