The History of the Christian Church

For 2nd generation Christians—let’s say, those who came to faith after AD 70, Jesus became less a person they’d personally known, or the friend of a friend—but more of a mysterious agent in a cosmic drama. (more…)

We start a new series here in Season 2 of CS. This time we’ll take a look at some of the notable Heretics & Heresies in Church History. Most of these we covered in Season 1. This time we’ll go a bit deeper. As we do, we just might discover that some of those movements and groups that have been classed as heretical, weren’t. Aberrant maybe, but heretical, not! As has been said; Winners write history. They get to tell the tale. It seems at least some of the reporting of Church officials misrepresented / mischaracterized the position of those they opposed and were able to stamp out. When the writings of these groups were systematically round & destroyed, all we’re left with is the account of their opponents; a questionable source at best. (more…)

We start a new series here in Season 2 of CS. This time we’ll take a look at some of the notable Heretics & Heresies in Church History. Most of these we covered in Season 1. This time we’ll go a bit deeper. As we do, we just might discover that some of those movements and groups that have been classed as heretical, weren’t. Aberrant maybe, but heretical, not! As has been said; Winners write history. They get to tell the tale. It seems at least some of the reporting of Church officials misrepresented / mischaracterized the position of those they opposed and were able to stamp out. When the writings of these groups were systematically round & destroyed, all we’re left with is the account of their opponents; a questionable source at best.

That is not to say every group deemed heretical wasn’t. Many were. In the early centuries most were. But during the late Middle Ages, many of the groups labeled “heretical” may have simply been outsiders to the politically accepted norm.

As we begin, we need to carve out a little time to define precisely what we mean by heresy.

The English word “heresy” is a transliteration of the Greek word hairesis which simply means “party” as in a sect; a group of people gathered around some identifying & uniting feature. The early use of the word was neutral and is seen that way 3 times in the Book of Acts.                                (5:17, 15:5 & 26:5)

But the word took on a strongly negative connotation early when it was used to describe those who deviated from the teaching of the Apostles and went off into error, as seen in 1 Cor 11:19 & Gal 5:20. Heresy wasn’t just a difference of opinion on some minor issue. It was a departure from those aspects of The Gospel that made Christianity what it fundamentally was as a coherent faith. If accepted, a heretical teaching placed the adherent outside the saving benefits of The Gospel. Heresy wasn’t just a difference of opinion; it was a difference in Belief regarding Truth.

The antonym of heresy is orthodoxy; a word derived from 2 Greek words meaning right and honor. Orthodoxy honors God rightly. Heresy dishonors God by clinging to ideas about Him and His ways that are untrue.

In order for something to be genuinely heretical, it needs to have some point of orthodoxy against which it kicks. So, atheism can’t be considered heretical since it doesn’t just deviate from theism. It categorically rejects theism. There isn’t any point of connection between the two. They are diametrically opposite worldviews.

For convenience sake, people have made a distinction between heresy and mere aberration. A heresy places the one who embraces it outside the realm of saving faith. The heretic is someone regarded as doomed to hell because she/he fails to hold faith in The Gospel of Jesus Christ as defined by the Apostles in the New Testament. Aberrant beliefs and movements are those that have deviated from the general stream of Christian orthodoxy in some non-essential realm of belief or practice. That is not to say aberrations aren’t potentially dangerous; they may be. But embracing them doesn’t exempt someone from salvation. It may hinder some aspect in their experience of a complete Christian life, but it won’t eternally doom them.

What I’m about to share now is difficult for some moderns to grasp. But it’s crucial to understanding how the Church has historically understood and dealt with heresy. The Enlightenment’s emphasis on secularism has profoundly colored Western civilization. While the roots of Western Civilization lie deep in a Biblical worldview, secularism has nevertheless managed to insinuate itself into that worldview, turning the ancient and medieval preoccupation with “the life to come” into a preoccupation with “this life now.” Simply put modern people tend to ask, “What is Faith doing for me right now,” rather than the question that framed the thinking of centuries worth of people across the ...

We’ve worked our way through 6 of what are known as the 7 Ecumenical Councils of Church History. We’ve examined the Councils and the Creeds they produced. Although, after the First Council in 325 at Nicaea, each subsequent Council claimed that all it was doing was refining the verbiage of the Nicaean Creed. Each claimed it was merely an extension of the ground-breaking work of that first august Council convened by the Emperor Constantine I.It seems fitting then that the last of the 7 Ecumenical Councils should come back to Nicaea 450 yrs later. But it’s work had little to do with the Nicaean Creed.These 7 Councils are called Ecumenical because they are generally accepted by both the Western Roman Catholic & Eastern Orthodox churches as normative in defining doctrine. The Roman Church adds additional Councils and their creeds as definitive which the Eastern Church rejects as the Eastern Church recognizes its own councils and creeds Rome ignores. And of course the huge Nestorian Church in the East stopped honoring the councils with Ephesus.Before we get to the 7th Council, we need to talk a bit about a Council that was held 12 yrs after the Third Council of Constantinople we ended the last episode with.In 692, Emperor Justinian II convened yet another council in the Eastern capital to finish some of the work that had been omitted by both the 5th & 6th Councils, notably, some canons that needed addressing. For that reason, this Council is called the 5th-6th Council. But since that sounds silly, let’s use Latin so it’ll sound more scholarly = Voila! It’s the Quinisext Council. It was attended by 215 only Eastern bishops.Most of the canon work that was done aimed at settling ritual differences and coming to a standard practice of discipline for clergy in different regions. Since the Council was attended exclusively by Eastern bishops, it was the Eastern practice what was approved, at the expense of those in the West.The Council condemned the custom of Armenian churches who used undiluted wine in Communion. They also banned clerical nepotism, and the atrocious practice of eating eggs and cheese on the Saturdays and Sundays of Lent. Several canons seemed aimed at provoking hostility from Rome.While the Orthodox Church accepts the Quinisext Council as legit, Western Churches never accepted it as authoritative or in any sense ecumenical. How could it be when no Western bishop attended. Oh, there was a supposed papal legate in attendance; at least the record marks him there.But Rome says no such person ever existed! The Council made him up to make it appear the Pope’s authority was included. The Venerable Bede called the Quinisext Council the “Reprobate Synod.”The Pope at the time of the Council was Sergius I. He refused to endorse the canons & was ordered arrested by the Emperor & carried to Constantinople. But the City of Ravenna’s militia thwarted the troops attempt to seize him.Ah. Isn’t all this just lovely stuff? Isn’t it wonderful hearing about how loving and humble church leaders were? This is what happens when Church & State become aligned under the rule of frail, fallible human beings. This is what happens when those IN authority fail to abide under it.One of the most important products of the Quinisext Council was the official establishment of Pentarchy.Pentarchy was originally articulated in legislation laid out by Emperor Justinian I in the mid 6th C, then included in canon law in the Council which ranked the ecclesiastical sees of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem in order of authority & pre-eminence in that order. Justinian linked the administrative authority of the Church to that of the State. Rome was regarded as first among equals. But by the time of the Quinisext Council, Constantinople was regarded as New Rome and had achieve parity with Rome in terms of ecclesiastical weight. At least, the Eastern Bishops thought so. Rome and the west, not so much. So they rejected the Council outright.While the Pentarchy was a technical reality due to Justinian’s legislation, it had little weight in determining anything other than one more point for the East & West to argue over.And that brings us to the 7th Ecumenical Council – the Second Council of Nicaea, in 787.In a word, it met to deal with the use of icons.Since we dealt with the Iconoclast Controversy in Season 1, we’ll summarize here.The veneration of icons was banned by the Byzantine Emperor Constantine V. His actions were endorsed by the Council of Hieria in 754. Now, you know how people are. Whatever the ruler says, they all happily comply with, right? Especially when it comes to religious sensitivities and issues of conscience. Yeah – not so much.The iconodules, that is, the supporters of icons rallied and staged a protest that was nothing if not vehement. But the Emperor stuck to his guns and kept the iconoclast policy in place. He vigorously enforcement the ban & persecuted violators. His son, Leo IV continued his policy but died while still young. Leo’s widow, Irene of Athens, then acted as regent and began a restoration of icon veneration.In 784, the imperial secretary Tarasius was appointed as the successor to Constantinople’s Patriarch, Paul IV. Not wanting to take charge of a fragmented church, he consented to become Patriarch on the condition icons could once again be venerated. But since a Council claiming to be ecumenical had abolished icons, another council could be necessary to re- allow them.To make the Council genuinely ecumenical, the Eastern Church realized it HAD to include the Western Church and invited Pope Adrian I to participate. He accepted, but showed his authorization of the Council by sending legates as his reps.The Council met in the Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople in 786. When iconoclast elements of the military sought to break it up, the government devised a way to get rid of them. They mocked up a bogus campaign & sent the troops to go deal with it. Once they arrived at their destination, they were surrounded, disarmed, and disbanded.The Council was once again summoned to meet, but since the Capital was still torn by iconoclast factions, they chose to meet in nearby Nicaea. The Council met for their First Session on Sept 24, 787 with 350 bishops & their attendants. Patriarch Tarasius presided over 7 sessions that lasted through later October.The main work of the Council was to reinstall the veneration of icons in the worship of the Church.Both the Eastern & Western Churches endorsed the findings of the Council. The last time they’d agree on just about anything.

Let’s get ready to rumble!Well--It’s not exactly a rumble we’re in for in this episode, so much as a tumble into the rabbit hole of theological wrangling that took place after the Council of Chalcedon that led to the 2nd & 3rd Councils at Constantinople in 553 & 680. (more…)

In 431, the Council of Ephesus dismissed Nestorius’ explanation of the dual nature of Christ in favor of Cyril’s. But that Council was swayed more by circumstance and politics than by sound theology. While Nestorius’ Christology was mis-represented by his critics to be proposing, not just two natures to Jesus, but two persons, Cyril’s Christology put such heavy emphasis on Jesus’ deity, his Christology leaned toward monophysitism; that is, casting Jesus as having a single nature. (more…)

In the last couple episodes we’ve set the scene for the Council of Ephesus in 431. Last time we did biographies of the two main players at the Council, Nestorius and Cyril.We ended with a brief review of their different Christologies; that is, how they viewed the dual nature of Christ as God & Man. Let’s pick it up now with the events leading to the Council. (more…)

In the last episode, we introduced the political situation framing the debate that ensued between two church leaders at the Council of Ephesus in 431.Those two leaders were Nestorius, Patriarch of the Capital Church at Constantinople and Cyril, arch-bishop at Alexandria. Let’s get in to the background on these two men so we can better understand the brueha that happened at Ephesus. (more…)

Buckle up for this episode, because it’s a rocky ride. We’ve come to the Third Ecumenical Church Council. And for those of you who remember this one from Season 1, you know where in for troubled times. We’re looking at the Council of Ephesus in 431 and the battle between Cyril & Nestorius. (more…)

This is part 5 of our series on the Creeds in which we’ll be taking a look at the First Council of Constantinople.In Part 3 we looked at the First Council of Nicaea in 325. While the Church had a lot to deal with in the decades that followed, they didn’t convene another Council for almost 60 yrs. (more…)