hod of viewing things which considerably weakens the
significance of miracles and prophecies. In general it must be said that
Origen helped to drag into the Church a great many ancient (heathen)
ideas about expiation and redemption, inasmuch as he everywhere found
some Bible passage or other with which he associated them. While he
rejected polytheism and gave little countenance to people who declared:
[Greek: eusebesteroi esmen kai Theon kai ta agalmata sebontes] (Clemens
Rom., Hom. XI. 12), he had for all that a principal share in introducing
the apparatus of polytheism into the Church (see also the way in which
he strengthened angel and hero worship).]

[Footnote 790: See above, p. 342. note 1, on the idea that Christ, the
Crucified One, is of no importance to the perfect. Only the teacher is
of account in this case. To Clement and Origen, however, teacher and
mystagogue are as closely connected as they are to most Gnostics.
Christianity is [Greek: mathesis] and [Greek: mystagogia] and it is the
one because it is the other. But in all stages Christianity has
ultimately the same object, namely, to effect a reconciliation with God,
and deify man. See c. Cels. III. 28: [Greek: Alla gar kai ten katabasan
eis anthropinen physin kai eis anthropinas peristaseis dynamin, kai
analabousan psychen kai soma anthropinon, heoron ek tou pisteuesthai
meta ton theioteron symballomenen eis soterian tois pisteuousin orosin,
ap' ekeinou erxato theia kai anthropine sunuphainesthai physis en e
anthropine te pros to theioteron koinonia genetai theia ouk en mono to
Iesou, alla kai pasi tois meta too pisteuein analambanousi bion, hon
Iesous edidaxena].]

[Footnote 791: From this also we can very clearly understand Origen's
aversion to the early Christian eschatology. In his view the demons are
already overcome by the work of Christ. We need only point out that this
conception must have exercised a most important influence on his frame
of mind and on politics.]

[Footnote 792: Clement still advocated docetic views without
reservation. Photius (Biblioth. 109) reproached him with these ([Greek:
me sarkothenai ton logon alla doxai]), and they may be proved from the
Adumbrat, p. 87 (ed Zahn): "fertur in traditionibus--namely, in the Acta
of Lucius--quoniam Iohannes ipsum corpus (Christi), quod erat
extrinsecus, tangens manum suam in profunda misisse et duritiam carnis
nullo modo reluctatam esse, sed locum manui praebuisse discipuli," and
likewi