De Lubac demonstrates that Origen’s eschatology is scattered among the works that survive, and the bits that we can gather seem mutually contradictory. We do not have his treatise on the resurrection; if this turns up, it could make matters much clearer.

One thing, however, is certain: when Origen engaged in speculation, he urged his audience to rely on the teaching of the Catholic Church and not on the thoughts of a theologian. He desired only to be a “man of the Church” (his phrase). If he was very wrong in a matter of eschatology, he would certainly not be alone among the Fathers, especially the early Fathers. We tend to forgive the ante-Nicenes even their imprecise language regarding the hypostatic union and the Trinitarian communion. We tend to forgive Gregory of Nyssa his own universalist tendencies. It’s possible that Origen was well intentioned, but wrong about a teaching that was still not clearly defined.