We hear the accusations of heresy quite often from some people online. Either the accusation is a blanket term of heresy while others may use certain terms we are unfamiliar with. I wish to go over an exhaustive list of possible heresies and explain what they are. Before we do this, we need to define heresy. Heresy, according to the "Episcopal Dictionary of the Church" is "is derived from the Greek hairesis, which means “choice” or “thing chosen.” Traditionally, heresy was the sin of a baptized and professing Christian who denied a defined doctrine of the faith. Heresy is distinguished from apostasy, the abandonment of the church by one who denies the church's teaching; and from schism, the fracturing of the church's unity for reasons other than disagreement in basic doctrine. Many of the classical formulations of the Christian faith were made by the ecumenical councils in response to beliefs that were later judged to be heretical."
There are some heresies like Judaizers that will not be discussed here as most reading the Bible will be familiar with them. This is to go over those which are found after the composition of the New Testament writings. Furthermore, I highly recommend you do your own research on these groups since these will just be a brief introduction into them. Let us now go over by some of these heresies.
DOCETISM
We define Docetism by the Episcopal Dictionary as a "heretical teaching about the person of Christ which holds that Christ, the divine Word, only seemed to assume the flesh of Jesus. The term is from the Greek dokein, "to seem." Jesus' life, suffering, death, and bodily resurrection were considered unreal. It thus undermines belief in the reality of the Incarnation as a doctrine of Christian faith. The roots of docetism lie in the pervasive Greek understanding of matter as evil and of God as incapable of suffering or "impassive."" We see here that what we deal with is an idea of evaluating the spiritual or divine above the flesh of Christ, leading to the Episcopal Dictionary to say that "extreme emphasis on the divinity of Christ at the expense of his humanity has docetic implications. Docetism continues to be a temptation to those who idealize the figure of Jesus."
Docetism is a subset of Gnosticism, which is also a heretical belief, but it will get it's own article in the future. The idea ultimately coincides with the Gnostic beliefs in the evil and wickedness of the material world in favor of the spiritual, which causes the belief to form that Christ did not truly have a real body. The Docetics were also called "Illusionists" since they believed that the body of Christ was an illusion and that Christ did not actually die on the cross, but was simply an illusion. In other words, Jesus was not human but only appeared human.
The Apostles fought this heresy pretty early in their lives with Paul talking about it in Colossians and John refers to it in his 1st and 2nd epistles. Several other apostolic fathers talked about this heresy as well, including Justin Martyr. Some suggest that the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD condemned this heresy, but only indirectly. The Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD is ultimately what leads to the condemnation as there was a charge brought against one of the people under trial for beliefs to it.
This heresy is problematic because it denies the doctrine of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, leading us to not have an atonement theology proper regarding sins being paid for on the cross. It also reduces God to being an impersonal God as well as making the person of Christ being turned into a liar. So whenever you see anybody emphasizing the divinity of Jesus extremely over His humanity, then you will be reaching into the realm of Docetism.
MONTANISM
The heresy of Montanism was founded by Montanus, a self-proclaimed prophet in Asia Minor back during the 2nd century. He, along with his prophetess followers named Priscilla and Maximilla, were going around encouraging a more prophetic spirit of revelation as opposed to what was written in the Bible. Montanus even went further by claiming to be "the Father, the Word, and the Paraclete." He would thus refer to himself as God, especially with reference to the Paraclete in John 14. It wasn't because he thought he was God, but that he was possessed by God and God spoke through him directly.
Eusebius tells us in Book 5 plenty about Montanus, with Chapter 16 telling us that Montanus "became beside himself, and being suddenly in a sort of frenzy and ecstasy, he raved, and began to babble and utter strange things, prophesying in a manner contrary to the constant custom of the Church handed down by tradition from the beginning." So it wasn't about keeping to church tradition or relying on the tradition of the bible, but it was about new "revelations" from the "Spirit" that caused a beginning schism into the Church.
We know of somebody who eventually became influenced by Montanism named Tertullian, however there is debate on if he affirmed a heretical form of it since Montanism differed from regions. The Montanism of Asia Minor differed from the Montanism in Africa where Tertullian was. They encouraged certain aspects of ascetic living like intense fasts and having women wearing veils.
The group can easily be viewed as an early form of the Charismatic Christians we see, with focus on the kind from Africa being an early form of Pentecostalism since they also have an emphasis on the use of the spiritual gifts, but do not try to go towards the heresies and strict rules that Montanus himself sought for the Church to follow after. This group would be condemned at the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD.
ADOPTIONISM
What exactly is Adoptionism? It's not a heresy against adopting children, but a heresy that teaches that Jesus Christ was not always the Son of God. The Episcopal Dictionary defines it as the "teaching that Jesus was born an “ordinary man” who lived an exemplary life pleasing to God and was consequently “adopted” by God as the divine Son. The moment of adoption was usually considered to be his baptism. Jesus' resurrection was also considered by some the moment of his adoption. Adoptionism relaxes the paradoxical divine-human relationship in Jesus in the interest of emphasizing his independent humanity. The church has regularly found this teaching one-sided and heretical in its failure to give full expression to Jesus' divine nature."
This heresy also belongs to a family of heresies categorized as Monarchianism, which "is a teaching about God which flourished in the second and third centuries. It stressed the unity (or monarchy) of God rather than the three persons, Father, Son, and Spirit." This sort of heretical idea rejects discussing the details of Trinitarianism. However, this doesn't mean they won't discuss it at all, but that they cannot consistently account for Trinitarianism in their worldview. Hence, most of these Monarchians are ultimately Unitarians.
Adoptionism is easily refuted in the fact that John 1 mentions that Christ as the word, who became flesh, was God in the beginning. This beginning refers to the creation of the universe and thus is easily a case for the eternality of Christ's sonship and divinity. Adoptionism will easily fail at this, but it didn't stop the 8th century revivalists of this heresy named Elipandus and Felix. Adoptionism would be condemned ultimately at Nicaea and Constantinople with the Nicene Creeds formed, but the Council of Frankfurt in 794 would be the formal condemnation of it.
MODALISM/PATRIPASSIANISM
The other form of Monarchian heresy would be in Modalism, which teaches that God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but that God is not a Trinity. Instead, we see God is manifested into three different modes or forms much how water can be manifested through ice, liquid and vapor. This heresy was taught by Noetus, Sabellius and Praxaes, which lead to the church having to wrestle with this heretical teaching multiple times.
One problem that arises at the use of this heresy is regarding the baptism of Jesus where we see that clearly all three persons of the Trinity are present in Matthew 3:13-17. The only way for this to work is to somehow suggest that Jesus was a great illusionist and ventriloquist to be able to do this. However, they would usually not try to suggest that since it would make no sense, which leads this to being a self-defeater of Modalism.
Patripassianism, the other form of this heresy by name, is the idea that the Father suffered on the cross in the form or mode of Jesus Christ. This was the particular flavor of heresy that was espoused by Sabellius during his time, but eventually it would be condemned at the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD. Yet, we do not fail to see the last of it as it tends to find a way to be restored in teachings through our modern churches today.
We can see the doctrine of Modalism come out in the form of Oneness Pentecostalism in denominations like the United Pentecostal Church International, which teach against the trinity and believe in a oneness mode of baptism by saying "in the name of Jesus" only. Among the popular teachers of Modalism is T. D. Jakes, a pastor at a non-denominational church where he has preached on doctrines very much identical to the heresy of Modalism.
UNIVERSALISM
Universalism is a pretty popular and sometimes even more desired heresy that many wish to be true, one that I actually used to believe during my early years after converting to Christianity. The main advocate for this that we see is an ecclesiastical writer by the name of Origen of Alexandria. What exactly is Universalism though? We need to help define it based on the Christian context in order to see why it is heretical for a Christian to affirm it.
Universalism is the doctrine which teaches that every human being is going to heaven when they die, especially through the atonement of Christ in the Christian Universalism framework. This would argue that even the souls in Hell would eventually be reconciled into Heaven when Christ returns. This obviously disagrees with the passages on Hell being an "eternal punishment" as opposed to a temporary punishment.
This would be condemned at the Synod of Constantinople in 543 AD before it would be condemned 10 years later at the Second Council of Constantinople regarding Origen and his promoted beliefs. There are even several people out there who still try adhere to a form of Christian Universalism in the Church, especially among the academics out there.
MARCIONISM
Marcionism is a very interesting belief that can be boiled down to Anti-Semitism influencing a belief system. Marcion of Sinope was pretty much under the impression from Gnostic surroundings that the God of the Old Testament is evil while the God of the New Testament is good. Because of him believing the Old Testament taught an evil God, he believed that we should reject the canon of the Old Testament as part of the Christian Scriptures.
Marcion was certainly not well received where Irenaeus, Justin Martyr and Tertullian make reference to him in their writings with Tertullian dedicating a set of five books called Against Marcion. He also seemed to adopt Docetism by believing Christ was the good God who descended down from Heaven and not actually being born from the Virgin Mary. He would, as a result, deny the crucifixion and even rejected the idea of the resurrection of the believers. Considering this and his minimal canon list, he wouldn't be received too well in the Church.
What was the biblical canon that he held? According to Phillip Schaff in his 2nd Volume of the Christian Church, he mentions that it "consisted of only eleven books, an abridged and mutilated Gospel of Luke, and ten of Paul’s epistles. He put Galatians first in order, and called Ephesians the Epistle to the Laodicaeans. He rejected the pastoral epistles, in which the forerunners of Gnosticism are condemned, the Epistle to the Hebrews, Matthew, Mark, John, the Acts, the Catholic Epistles, and the Apocalypse." So we see that he also rejected some of the Jewish aspects found in the New Testament epistles.
Marcion was not formally condemned as a heretic, but the Councils condemning Gnosticism and the sub branches would be enough to condemn him as a heretic. It is shocking that there is modern Marcionites among not just some supposed "Christians," but there are atheists who use similar arguments that Marcion made regarding Old Testament objections and can show off a sense of Anti-Semitism that has been planted for the future generations thanks to folks like Marcion.
NOVATIANISM
Novatian was a 3rd century theologian who introduced this particular heresy. Novatianism is a heresy that was moreso dealing with the idea of church discipline during a time of intense persecution which caused some Christians to cave in under Emperor Decius. They caved in by denying their Christian faith, but some eventually wanted to return to Church after the persecution was starting to get more zealous and strict. Plus, there was the fact that Novatian was inspired by Tertullian's writings, but not necessarily meaning this was a good justification.
Some of these beliefs about those who denied the faith were that they shouldn't be allowed back in the Church, but they could still do permanent penance and pray that God would forgive them since there was no forgiveness for them on Earth. Because of this, Novatian did affirm a belief that you didn't have to be a Christian in the Church in order to be saved and taught that you could be a non-Christian and still be saved outside of the Church. It took issue with the idea of letting "sinners" into the Church.
One of the big critics was a Bishop by the name of Cyprian of Carthage, who once said "outside the Church, there is no salvation." Cyprian took issue with this and there is a letter attributed to him that was regarded as a treatise against Novatian. While Novatian was a trinitarian in orthodoxy, he did hold to some false gospel issues when it came to Church discipline and Christian unity.
Eventually Pope Cornelius, a Bishop whom Novatian had issues with, would condemn him as a heretic and his sect at a Synod in Rome during the year of 251 AD. Novatian can be found in some slight churches today whenever anybody claims that some people are beyond forgiveness to join the Church and teaching that one can find salvation outside of being a Christian in the Church or body of our Lord, Jesus Christ.
ARIANISM
The famous of the ancient heresies that ended up leading to the famous Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. Arianism was led by a Bishop named Arius of Alexandria, who began to teach that Jesus was a created being and not God. There was a few other beliefs, but this was the chief issue which got Arius to be a heretic at a local council in 321 AD. However, instead of just letting himself fade out, he went to Palestine and gained another following. It lead the Church to get into an interesting divide that caused Emperor Constantine to get involved since he saw this division as a threat to the empire.
Arianism is defined by the Episcopal Church Dictionary as the "teaching that the Son of God was a creature "of like substance" (homoiousios), though not identical with God... Arius was not primarily interested in the relationship between the divinity and humanity of Jesus. He was concerned to preserve the unity, sole eternity, and self-existence of God. The famous epitome of Arius's position is, "There was when the Son was not.""
Arianism was condemned at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD as Athanasius of Alexandria would refute him easily at the debate. There is also a supposed legend that as Arius was singing a hymn about Christ being a created being at the council, Saint Nicholas approached this man and slapped him before the council of 300 people. It would certainly be a more fun Christmas story to tell, honestly.
Arianism is still strong today with Jehovah's Witnesses today who reject the Trinity and teach a strong emphasis of Arianism in much different terms. However, there are other small "Christian" and secular communities today who will teach that Jesus is simply a very good person or created being like us instead of being God.
MACEDONIANISM
Macedonianism is a heresy which can be summarized as Semi Arianism. While the Son was viewed as eternal in their eyes, the heretics affirming this doctrine would suggest that Christ was not of one being/essence with the Father, but of like essence. However, they would still deny that the Holy Spirit was God and claimed the Holy Spirit was a created being.
The group that taught this would be referred to as the Pneumatomachi, founded by Macedonius I. This is interesting considering that this is the Bishop of Constantinople who was elected as such by the Arians. The name of the group meant Combators against the Spirit, which could be because of their rejection of the Holy Spirit as God.
None of their works survived and what is known is through writings of Athanasius of Alexandria, Basil of Caesarea, and Gregory of Nyssa. It was also condemned at the first Council of Constantinople in 381 AD with the statement found in the Nicene Creed defending the deity of the Holy Spirit in much more stronger language.
ANTIDICOMARIANISM
This heresy is one that might cause some people to be curious about it during it's condemnation during the early period of Church History. They will even be shocked if they are a Protestant since Antidicomarianism is the rejection of Mary as the perpetual or ever-virgin. While it was around during the 3rd to 5th century, it was referred to as the "opponents of Mary" by the Christians who objected to this heresy. This is a heresy that you will find among many Protestants today, but this being a lesser known heresy would be reasonable of them to not be aware of it.
Epiphanius of Salamis would be aware of this group and actually engaged with their doctrines. In his treatment of the heretics, he says "For I have heard from someone that certain persons are venturing to say that [Mary] had marital relations after the Savior’s birth. And I am not surprised. The ignorance of persons who do not know the sacred scriptures well and have not consulted histories, always turn them to one thing after another, and distracts anyone who wants to track down something about the truth out of his own head." It's fascinating to me how this ancient heresy has brought it's way back.
The more shocking fact is that the Reformation's Martin Luther, John Calvin, Theodore Beza, Huldreich Zwingli and Francis Turretin would all affirm this doctrine that some consider too Roman Catholic. However, it is telling that none of these Reformers were going to condemn it and it shows that there is more validity to this idea of heresy. You can also find a defense of it among Eusebius and Hippolytus. The Second Council of Constantinople in 553 AD would of course anathematize those who say "that God the Word was incarnate of the holy Mother of God, and ever Virgin Mary."
DONATISM
The Episcopal Church Dictionary defines Donatism as the following: "Donatists were the followers of Donatus Magnus, a schismatic Bishop of Carthage in the mid-fourth century, who believed that the validity of a sacrament depended on the personal virtue of the celebrant. Many other North African Christians shared this view. In particular this group of rigorists rejected the ordination of Caecilian as Bishop of Carthage by a neighboring Bishop, who was falsely believed to have betrayed the church during the Diocletian persecutions earlier in the fourth century. Caecilian was excommunicated and Majorinus ordained in his stead. Caecilian was confirmed in his position by the Council of Arles in 314, but a flourishing schismatic church sprang up around Majorinus and his able and aggressive successor, Donatus. Imperial force was used for several decades to suppress the schism, and was met with widespread violent resistance. The Donatist sect survived for several centuries. Augustine engaged in a celebrated and extensive controversy with the Donatists. He established the catholic teaching that the validity of sacramental action depends upon the power of the Holy Spirit in the church, and not the personal character of the celebrant. Augustine argued that the catholic church is a mixed society in the process of salvation rather than a perfect society in itself."
Donatism would easily be seen as a schismatic kind of heresy which gets condemned at a conference in 411 AD. Donatism was very much calling for a purely ascetic living lifestyle similar to Montanism, which would explain this being in North Africa where there was likely still some early influence of Montanism found. The other contextual view is found in the Dioclectian persecution of Christians and how some were possibly willing to recant their faith in Christ in order to live. After the persecution and some survived, some Christians were not permitted viewed as having the right to be in Church office. Eventually, leading to the view that only the Church of Carthage was the one true Church.
There are some small Church groups out there who wish to emphasis their own unique standing as the true purity of the Church or even some big Churches today who wish to refer to themselves as the one true Church while excluding others. We need to follow the pattern and teaching of Augustine in this controversy which stressed unity among diversity over the emphasis of purity and sinlessness while having life in the Church.
APOLLINARIANISM
Apollinarianism was a very interesting controversy which was proposed by Apollinaris, the Bishop of Laodicea. This theory taught that Christ had a human body and a human sensitive soul, but he had a divine mind without any human mind. This would be a branch of heresy fitting what is often referred to as Monophysitism, a Christology that suggests their is only the divine nature with Christ and no human nature. This debate and category of heresy mostly stems from the ambiguous understanding of how exactly is Jesus God when it comes to the results after Nicaea's ecumenical council.
The Episcopal Church Dictionary tells us the following details on this heresy: "Apollinarius held that Christ had no human spirit. The Divine Logos was believed to take the place of the human spirit in Christ. Christ thus was understood to be fully divine but less than fully human. Apollinarianism was opposed by Gregory of Nazianzus and Gregory of Nyssa. It was condemned by the General Council of Constantinople I (381)."
We see a detailed layout of the belief in the seventh anathema of the Council with the following: "We pronounce anathema against them who say that the Word of God is in the human flesh in lieu and place of the human rational and intellective soul. For, the Word of God is the Son Himself. Neither did He come in the flesh to replace, but rather to assume and preserve from sin and save the rational and intellective soul of man."
SUBORDINATIONISM
Subordinationism is a heresy that teaches that Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit aren't just relationally subordinate to each other, but also ontologically subordinate to each other as well. Essentially, making The Son and the Holy Spirit inferior to the Father ontologically. This heresy was led to the development of some of the previous listed heresies including Arianism and Monarchianism.
The Economic Trinity refers to the order of subordination within the Trinity by saying the Son submits to the Father, but the Holy Spirit submits to both the Father and the Son. However, Subordinationism takes this idea of the Trinity and instead of using it to refer to a submission model by action, it suggests that Christ was truly lesser than the Father ontologically. When this is said, this makes Christ not God and not equal in unity with the Trinity.
The heresy was eventually condemned at the first Council of Constantinople, joining the rest of the heretical doctrines that were condemned there. This however has survived with some Muslims using verses like Mark 10:18 and John 14:28 to justify their accusation that Christ isn't God but a being who is inferior and has to submit to God. This fails to account for the fact that these verses were used to prove the deity of Christ.
PELAGIANISM
Pelagianism is a heresy that has been met with tons of feedback today where it's easily used as a condemnation tag by the Calvinist community and is being argued as "not heresy" by many Protestants seeking to become historical revisionists. Pelagianism however is not as simple and has even been tried to be pushed for in the Episcopal Church Diocese of Atlanta in 2011. So, what exactly is Pelagianism and what has led this heresy to be favored by some today over Christian Saints?
The Episcopal Church Dictionary defines Pelagianism as the following: "A heresy taking its name from Pelagius, a lay monk from either Britain or Ireland, who came to Rome in the early fifth century. Pelagius denied that infants were born in a state of original sin and taught that Christ came merely to give humankind a good example to counteract the bad example of Adam. Pelagius held that human beings alone were responsible for their good or evil actions. Pelagianism held that each person can take the first steps toward salvation without the help of grace. Pelagius and his followers were vigorously attacked by Augustine." Another important aspect to this is that similar to Montanism and Donatism, this heresy relied on an emphasis of ascetic living.
Pelagianism ultimately rejects Original Sin in favor of the teaching that the teaching of Adam's sin only affected himself and that Adam was not a representation of humanity. As a result, he would affirm that it was possible for a human being to be born not just without any guilt of sin, but to then go on living and never having committed any sin in their life. However, he would admit that this was so far only for the prophets and that even he wasn't sinless, but instructed the Church to start enforcing this idea so that the next generation could be sinless. Essentially, Pelagius was trying to enforce a monk lifestyle rules to the whole church, despite him not following some of the Orthodox rules for a monk.
Pelagius was very sneaky with double speaking and used that tactic to avoid condemnation as he recanted the teachings of his student, Caelestius, at the Synod of Diospolis in 415 AD, but continued preaching his message afterwards. After the doctrine spread in Carthage, the Council of Carthage in 419 AD was arranged and it declared Pelagius a heretic along with his teachings. These would be further condemned at the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus in 431 AD due to another issue that would eventually arise.
NESTORIANISM
Nestorianism is a heresy that I think is very important in how it rings in most Protestant churches today. It was also a controversy that Pelagius got himself involved with when retreating to the church of Nestorius, the Archbishop of Constantinople. This wasn't just any Archbishop, but an Archbishop of one of the chief regions of Christian history. However, what was the heresy that got Nestorius in trouble? It deals with an issue that argues with Christology and the question that goes like this: "Is Mary the Mother of God?"
Nestorianism is defined in the Episcopal Church Dictionary as the "heretical teaching that understood Christ to be two persons, one human and one divine. It also held that Mary was not the Mother of God (“Theotokos”), but only the mother of the human Christ... Nestorianism was condemned at the Council at Ephesus (431), under the presidency of St. Cyril of Alexandria. The Council also upheld Mary's title Theotokos, acknowledging Jesus Christ to be “one and the same” divine person. The Chalcedonian Definition (451) subsequently affirmed that Jesus Christ is at once truly God and truly man in two natures “without separation, without division.”"
So we see that this is the opposite of doctrines like Docetism which try to emphasize the divinity of Christ, but this heresy didn't want to necessarily negate it. The issue arose with Mary being called the Theotokos or God-Bearer. Nestorius disagreed with this doctrine and thought it was fitting to call Mary the Christokos or Christ-Bearer. Which ultimately lead to Nestorius affirming that he believed that there was two very diverse persons in Christ which was the man Jesus Christ and the Logos that dwelt within the man. Thus, they could argue that God didn't die on the cross since God cannot die, but that it was Christ the man who died.
This heresy, as mentioned, was condemned at the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD, but it eventually led to some other issues as while Cyril of Alexandria was certainly opposed to Nestorius during their writings, Nestorius was confessing different things to John of Antioch. So we have three Patriarchs of their churches writing back and forth regarding this manner and John of Antioch thought the heresy charge was unnecessary because he didn't think Nestorius was a heretic and was upset when he arrived and found the council started before John arrived. However, Cyril and John would eventually reconcile in 433 AD with the Formula of Reunion over this issue. However we learn the following: If you see anybody rejecting calling Mary the Mother of God, like most Calvinists tend to do, then it's likely they are embracing a form of Nestorianism.
EUTYCHIANISM
This other form of Monophysitism is from Eutyches of Constantinople, defined by the Episcopal Church Dictionary as such: "Heretical teaching about the person of Christ associated with Eutyches (c. 378-454). He was the archimandrite (monastic superior) of a large monastery in Constantinople, and influential at the imperial court in Constantinople in the middle of the fifth century. Eutyches was caught up in the controversy then raging over the relationship between the humanity and divinity of Christ... Eutyches taught that Christ was one person (hypostasis or prosopon) with just one nature. Hence, Eutychianism is also called monophysitism. It is not clear whether Eutyches held the one nature of Christ to be simply divine, or whether it was a “third thing” between divinity and humanity. He taught that Christ's one nature was not consubstantial with our humanity. His Christology was unbalanced because he did not uphold the full humanity of Christ. This teaching led his followers toward Docetism. Eutychianism was condemned by the Council of Chalcedon. Eutychianism has been characterized as the opposite and symmetrical error of Nestorianism."
As you can see, we find several issues with this doctrine that was set as a response to Nestorianism, but it just led to more issues. In order to not hold to the idea that Nestorianism and Christ having two persons and two natures, Eutyches settled for having one person and one nature. Essentially, he argued that the humanity of Christ was absorbed by the divine nature so that Christ only had the divine nature without any humanity in Him. This is found in the confession that Eutyches made by saying "I confess that our Lord was of two natures before the union, but after the union I confess one nature."
This would be dealt with at the Council of Chalcedon with a statement known as the Chalcedonian Definition. The relevant portion affirming true orthodoxy is read as Christ being "recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the Fathers has handed down to us."
SEMI-PELAGIANISM
Semi-Pelagianism is a movement that would get traction later on after the Pelagianism controversy, but it wasn't called this particular name until much later. There is mystery surrounding this heresy as it was mostly a title or accusation aimed towards Luis de Molina's theology of Molinism. While this was questionable, the real heresy can be traced to the early fifth century with monks in Southern Gaul.
This heresy was a mix of both Augustine and Pelagius' doctrines combined into it's own unique blend doctrine where faith could be accomplished by the human will alone, sanctifying grace can be obtained by the natural will of men alone without the need of actual grace and once man does have justified grace, he doesn't need any additional grace from God. This heresy would eventually be declared such at the Second Council of Orange in 529 AD.
John Cassian, the abbot of the monastery of monks in Southern Gaul, is usually attributed to as the teacher of this heresy, but some suggest he would later recant of it. His writings are complicated and do contain some good wisdom in them. Especially since John Cassian is considered a saint even among the Anglican Communion.
ICONOCLASM
So, I have covered this heresy and refuted in great detail in a previous article, so I won't go too much into it here. What I will say is that it is a heresy which ultimately costed people their lives and it resulted in the final Ecumenical Council of the Church Catholic known as the Second Council of Nicaea in 787 AD. As I once defined it before, "Iconoclasm is an ancient Christian heresy that essentially affirms not just the rejection of, but the destruction of Christian art, statues and icons."
This heresy is rooted in a distorted interpretation of the 2nd Commandment which tells you to not built graven images in the form of an idol. However, the heresy was addressed by John of Damascus in his three treatises on the subject which I highly recommend anybody to read here. The heresy was eventually condemned at the council and it lives on through Calvinist teachings, especially among the Puritans.
MONOTHELITISM
The Episcopal Church Dictionary defines this as a "seventh-century christological teaching advocated by Sergius of Constantinople, Cyrus of Alexandria, and others. It presented the Person of Christ as having one divine will under which his human will was subsumed. Monothelitism was consistent with the Chalcedonian Definition concerning the two natures of the Person of Christ. But monothelitism upset the balance between Christ's divinity and his humanity by upholding only one independent divine will. It was declared heretical at the Sixth Ecumenical Council (III Constantinople) in 680-681, which held "...there are two natures unconfusedly, unchangeably, undividedly, and two natural wills and two natural operations....""
Monothelitism is an interesting controversy since we see this is a heresy that we find in a former Pope by the name of Pope Honorius I as well, who helped to spread the heresy through his time as Bishop of Rome. However, he wasn't free from criticism and he was condemned along with the heresy at the Third Council of Constantinople. But this heresy removes the humanity of Christ similar to the earlier heresies, but at the cost of removing essential elements to Christ's person.
PAULICIANISM
This heresy is a mix of Gnostic dualism and Adoptionism. They would affirm that material world is evil and the only way to be saved is by rejecting everything that the material world has to offer. They also rejected the Trinity and their view was similar to either the Arians or Adoptionism, where the early church used the former.
SOCIANIANISM
Now we are getting into some of the heresies of the Protestant Reformation days which were dealt with. This one gets into an anti-Trinitarian heresy mixed with the rejection of Original Sin and affirming humans were always going to die in the beginning even before the forbidden fruit was taken. Their main teachings come from the founder, Socinus, and the Catechism of Racow. The theology of Socianism can be boiled down to a theology where the Bible must be interpreted according to reason and empiricism.
Their view of the Trinity is based on a view of divine simplicity that tries to render the distinction of persons to be destructive to the simple nature of God. It would argue for Unitarianism similar to the Arian heresy. Their view of the atonement was also that it didn't pay for our sins, since they adopted the moral example theory of the atonement that says Christ dying on the cross was simply to show us what good morality looks like and what the consequences of not doing good is. It essentially sends Jesus to dying with nothing actually happening to us and our being.
This was condemned by several Christians including Francis Turretin, but some of the errors of Socinianism were repeats of past errors at the Ecumenical Councils of the past. There is also the question of speculation regarding whether or not their view of open theism would be considered heretical due to this being the earliest sect we might see open theism stated. Either way, Socinianism can easily be summed up as theism that relies on empiricism as it's ultimate starting point without the Triune God.
ANTINOMIANISM
Antinomianism is a heresy that tries to focus on removing the need to do good works. The Episcopal Church Dictionary gives the following: "In Christian theology it denotes the doctrine that grace frees believers from the Law. The word “antinomian” seems to have emerged in the sixteenth century when it was applied to the teaching of the Lutheran theologian, J. Agricola, as well as that of certain Anabaptist sects. Although the word antinomian was not used in earlier times, St. Paul himself was accused of setting aside the force of the Law because of his teaching about justification. Lutheranism is thought by some to have invited antinomianism because of its emphasis on justification by faith alone. Anglican opposition to antinomianism is indicated in Article XII of the Articles of Religion: “Good works . . . cannot put away our sins; . . . yet they are pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ.”"
It all began in 1525 when a student of Martin Luther named Johannes Agricola publishes his commentary on Luke arguing for Antinomianism, suggesting that the good works are not necessary or needed for the faith. Martin Luther and Philip Melanchton would both respond to this person in their own treatises to the subject, engaging in a back and forth debate on it. This controversy helped to settle a debate regarding how we should understand Martin Luther's doctrine of Justification of by Faith Alone. Luther did not mean to negate good works all together in salvation, but Agricola would not really consider this.
Agricola would eventually recant of his heresy and embrace the orthodox position of works being necessary in the Christian faith. However, we can still see this found in several Protestant Christians today, especially among the New Independent Fundamentalist Baptists with teachers like Steven Anderson and the scholars in the Grace Evangelical Society. So if somebody downplays the need of good works in the Christian faith, it's very possible that they are a Antimonian.
JANSENISM
Jansenism was founded by Cornelius Jansen, Bishop of Ypres, in the 17th century of the Church. This heresy would be the actual heresy church that normally Calvinists get accused of quite often. Let us examine what exactly this particular heresy taught that got it to be grouped together with the Calvinists and know of the distinct doctrines.
Jansenism's beliefs were summarized by a papal bull from Pope Innocent X in 1653 named "Cum occasione" and they reveal five chief points. They affirmed that some of God's commands just cannot be kept at all and will not be given grace for it, nobody resists interior grace in the fallen nature, people lacking free will can merit grace, prevenient grace was necessary but humans weren't free to accept or resist it, and they believed Christ dying for all was Semi-Pelagianism. So not only did they teach heresy, but they misunderstood heresy.
After the bull was sent, the Jansenists would affirm the condemnation yet claim they didn't apply to Jansen's teachings since the Pope got them wrong and misunderstood him. Sometimes, I am starting to wonder if there is a pattern of heretics denying their heresy when caught in it. It is also interesting to know that Hyper Calvinists would fit the category of Jansenism today.
These are but a few of the heresies that exist out there in the early and medieval Church period, but they are still very important. We need to remember and study the heresies of the past in order that we should avoid repeating them. If we do not know history, we are doomed to repeat it. May God have mercy upon us and deliver us from the grasp of heresy. Amen.
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment