Ecumenical councils on Origen

Origen did have some decent commentaries on Holy Scripture. However, what has been lacking in the 20th and 21st Centuries is the simple fact what the ecumenical councils said about the man, who famously taught 1)pre-existence of the soul 2) Hell will be burnt out 3)all men and fallen angels will be restored to God--thus all men will be saved. As I noted elsewhere, Origen never taught reincarnation, in fact, he explicitly rejected it. The Second Vatican Council does cite Origen's commentaries a number of times, but in no way to approve of his doctrine. In fact, at the editing of Lumen Gentium 48, a father was concerned Origenism would be understood by the wording, to which the commission stated the doctrine was not being taught at all.

Concerning doctrine and person of Origen (as well as his disciple Didymus the Blind), ecumenical councils stated the following:

If anyone does not anathematize Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, Apollinarius Nestorius, Eutyches and Origen, as well as their heretical books, and also all other heretics who have already been condemned and anathematized by the holy, catholic and apostolic church and by the four holy synods which have already been mentioned, and also all those who have thought or now think in the same way as the aforesaid heretics and who persist in their error even to death: let him be anathema.--Constantinople II (AD 553), Anathemas against the "Three Chapters", Canon XI

the fifth holy synod, the latest of them, which was gathered here against Theodore of Mopsuestia, Origen, Didymus and Evagrius, and the writings of Theodoret against the twelve chapters of the renowned Cyril, and the letter said to have been written by Ibas to Mari the Persian.--Constantinople III (AD 680-681), Exposition of Faith

We reject along with them Severus Peter and their interconnected band with their many blasphemies, in whose company we anathematize the mythical speculations of Origen, Evagrius and Didymus, as did the fifth synod, that assembled at {5}Constantinople.--Nicaea II (AD 787), Definition 

we anathematize Severus , Peter and Zoharas the Syrian, as well as Origen with his useless knowledge, Theodore of Mopsuestia and Didymus along with Evagrius, who also, although of the same or different opinions, were ensnared in the same pit of damnation.--Constantinople IV (AD 869), Definition  

It also embraces, approves and accepts the fifth holy synod, the second of Constantinople, which was held in the time of our predecessor most blessed Vigilius and the emperor Justinian. In it the definition of the sacred council of Chalcedon about the two natures and the one person of Christ was renewed and many errors of Origen and his followers, especially about the penitence and liberation of demons and other condemned beings, were refuted and condemned.--Council of Florence, Session XI: Bull of union with the Copts, February 4, 1442

As we can, see Origen was personally anathematized by the Church, as well as his doctrines and his pupils. Even furthermore, Constantinople IV refers to his "useless knowledge" and Nicea II to his "mythical speculations."

Origen lived in the 3rd Century, but it took until the 6th century to condemn him as a heretic by an Ecumenical Council. During that time between some said he was a heretic, even Pelagius knew this and lived 150 years later, others saw him as a great theologian. Yet he was still anathematized. Others were believed to be orthodox in their lifetimes by many, yet were still condemned after their death as heretics. I suspect this will be the case with Hans Ur von Balthasar one day.