Heretic or Disciple?
All contents copyright
© 2014 by M.L. Wilson. All rights reserved. No part of this document or the
related files may be reproduced or transmitted in any form, by any means
(electronic, photocopying, recording, or otherwise) without the prior written
permission of the publisher.
*
* *
It
has been brought to my attention more than once that my teachings border on
what is regarded as heresy; that my beliefs are in direct opposition to God and
I am most certainly destined for hell as a result. Obviously I don’t see it
quite that way and have done my utmost to explain this to my detractors …
without much success. Sooner or later that word comes out and is thrown at me
with all the force the critic can muster. “You are
a HERETIC! Unless you repent of your ways, God will send you to hell!”
Variations
on this admonition have also demanded that I cease such teaching and stop
infecting others with my errors. To this, I am not only irritated, but bemused.
It seems as though I am having a “debate” with people who truly have not
bothered to ever read a thing I’ve written. Worse still, they seem to have
absolutely no idea what the word “heresy” means. Therefore, when the intended pejorative
is hurled at me with the intent to cause me harm, it instead falls flat.
What
is heresy? Why is it regarded as death to anyone within the church to be
labeled a heretic? Truly to answer this question, one must know the meaning of
the word. From there one must explore how this word has taken on the connotation
it has and why it is used to club anyone who dares stray off the orthodox path.
This
from Wikipedia:
Heresy
is any provocative belief or theory that is strongly at variance with
established beliefs or customs. A heretic is a proponent of such claims or
beliefs.[1] Heresy is distinct from both apostasy, which is the explicit
renunciation of one's religion, principles or cause,[2] and blasphemy, which is
irreverence toward religion.[3]
The
term is usually used to refer to violations of religious or traditional laws or
legal codes, although it is used by some political extremists to refer to their
opponents. It carries the connotation of behaviors or beliefs likely to
undermine accepted morality and cause tangible evils, damnation, or other
punishment.
This
is the textbook definition of heresy which is used today. However the etymology
of the word would leave one with a far different understanding. As I am well
familiar with the origin of this word and its usage, I have been left feeling
somewhat confused by those who use the term as though it is something to be
seen as bad.
The
term “heresy” is from the Greek αἵρεσις
and originally meant “choice” or “thing chosen.” In Christianity, heresy became a means by
which to control and keep people in line. This wasn’t the original intent nor
usage of the word; an early church father named Irenaeus, Bishop of Lugdunum
(modern-day Lyons, France) popularized the term in his tract, Contra Haereses (Against Heresies)
written in approximately 180 AD. The
primary reason for this work is that Irenaeus was concerned about the Gnostic
movement which was threatening the purity of the Gospel of Christ. Gnostics
were producing works masquerading as original writings of the Apostles which
gave an erroneous view of Christ, His life and mission while here on earth. It
also set about to rewrite salvation and the nature of God.
Against Heresies was a five-volume work which
Irenaeus felt was necessary to sort out the truth from the mounting lies of Gnosticism.
Many of these Gnostic works have resurfaced today and are looked upon by some
in theological circles as having merit. Such books as The Gospel of Judas, The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of the Lord
and the Gospel of Truth had sprung
up and were vying for the hearts and minds of the early church. Irenaeus did
what he could to point out the errors in these works and how they deviated from
the truth of the Gospels and the Apostle’s writings. In short, he pointed out
how these works took away from Christ rather than add to his Deity.
The Gospel of Thomas is an explicit example of the
type of deception employed by the Gnostics, making the boy Christ out to be a
moody bully with special powers. To believe that Christ could be anything like
the figure described in the Gospel of Thomas is to simply not understand who
Christ is at all. While I understand that many Doctorates in Theology tend to
lean more on the academic, if one claims to be a Christian and has spent many,
many years in study and still cannot
discern the character of Christ, one might be in need of serious prayerful
contemplation as to whether they’ve wasted their time and money.
Many who bandy about the term “heretic” so freely
believe they are given such license based upon Paul’s letter to Titus. A
reading in context would tend to show just the exact opposite of what Paul was
trying to convey however,
“But
avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and argument and quarrels about the
Law, because they are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once,
and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him. You
may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.” - Titus 3:9-10
Paul
also speaks of those teaching false doctrine in the early church.
“As I urged you when I went into
Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to
teach false doctrines any longer nor devote themselves to myths and endless
genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God’s work—which is by
faith. The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a
good conscience and a sincere faith.”
-
1st Timothy 1:3-4
Characteristic
of these early churches were those who saw an opportunity to rise above the
common man into a position of leadership if they could come to the people with
something akin to what the Apostles brought. In much the same way the Gnostics
would later promulgate their errors, these various individuals all about the
Empire saw an opportunity too good to pass up. Paul knew of these types as he
was well familiar with the personality make-up; Paul was trained as a Pharisee.
Shining more brightly than any other was what being a Pharisee was all about.
Paul makes note of this on several occasions, once describing himself as, “A Pharisee among Pharisees.” (Acts 23:6) Likewise Christ had critical words
for the Pharisees and their self indulgence and pomp.
False
doctrine would have been easy to see to the experienced eye as it would stand
in opposition to the teachings of Christ. This is important to remember because
as we will see, the term “Heretic” as applied to certain people later on in
history wasn’t applied to beliefs which stood in opposition to Christ, but
rather beliefs which stood in opposition to tradition. The Gnostics were called out by those in their day who
were as aware of the errors as Paul was aware of the usurpers amongst the
infant churches.
As
time went on, ferreting out the error became more and more difficult. By the
time of Constantine the Great, the infant church had grown, but was under
constant persecution; it was an outlaw faith. The Emperor Diocletian was particularly
brutal in his persecutions, slaughtering many Christians in horrific ways. Men,
women and children were all tortured and killed simply because the professed a
faith in Christ. In this formative period, few of these martyrs had ever seen a
word of the Gospel even if they were able to read. They relied upon what they
had been told by various church leaders and by creeds which they had learned.
The “doctrine” they were aware of was minuscule. They knew only of Christ
resurrected.
Constantine
changed all of that when he gathered together the leaders of the churches over
the breadth of the Empire to put together the official rules for the now “legitimized”
church. Of the eighteen hundred church leaders Constantine invited to the first
council (approximately one thousand from the East and eight hundred from the
West), only between two hundred fifty and three hundred eighteen showed. Most
assumed it to be a trap and stayed away. The largest numbers of attendees were
from the West.
A
part of what was decided at this council was the Holy Trinity. Prior to this
time, there was no official definition of the Trinity; the concept was largely
unknown to most of the early church. There was also the issue of deciding what
would be regarded as legitimate scripture and what was to be excised. The official
day of worship (the Sabbath) was moved from Saturday to Sunday. There was the introduction
of the Winter Solstice celebration to the Christians by making it Christ’s
birthday even though it had been largely understood that Christ was most likely
born in early Autumn. This same usurping was done to mask over Passover and the
celebration of Christ’s death, burial and resurrection. The new name given to
this celebration was the “Feast of Ishtar” or Easter.
The
above noted and more were all introduced into Christian worship and none was
called out as heretical. As a point of fact, many of these practices are still
celebrated in the church today and to NOT observe them as outlined by
Constantine’s council is regarded as heresy.
In
our 21st Century world, we sometimes take for granted all that has
transpired in the two thousand years since Christ walked the earth in the
flesh. We take for granted that our system of governance in the United States, Of the People, By the People and For the
People is an historical anomaly. The empires which have risen and fallen
since the inception of man have all been based around a king or monarch who
ruled unilaterally and autonomously. If such a ruler could also convince his
subjects God was standing with him, than that was all the better. Constantine
the Great was well aware of this and used the young Christian Church to help
knit his fractured Empire back together. However utilizing the Christians for
his purposes did not equate to actually being a Christian; Constantine had no
intention of relinquishing control. The Council of Nicaea established the new
rules irrespective of Christ’s teachings.
Over
the next one thousand years, these rules were used as a vicious club against
any and all who dared speak out against the obvious errors. People were burned
at the stake alive, they were beheaded, they were torn apart, they were
drowned, stoned, crushed, etc. These rules were not to be abridged under any
circumstances and to do so meant a certain, gruesome death to the offender.
Regardless,
many brave people did step forward and endured the slings and arrows of their
church leaders, rulers and fellow man to disseminate the truth. While they may
not have gotten all of the details correct, they felt a calling from the Spirit
and were compelled to speak about what they knew in their heart was truth. From
the Disciple Stephen stoned to death for believing in the risen Christ to those
today who are being killed in Muslim countries for the exact same reason, the
establishment has hated the truth.
John Wycliffe
(1320 – 1384) was an English philosopher, theologian and lay preacher and
translator. He was famous for his criticism of the Papacy and the doctrines of
the Catholic Church and spent his life battling against them. Ten years after
his death from a stroke, Wycliffe was declared a heretic by the Council of
Constance in 1415. He was defrocked, his writings burned and his body disinterred.
In 1428, Pope Martin commanded a posthumous execution of Wycliffe and had his
corpse burned and his ashes cast into the River Swift.
Jan Hus
(1369 – 1415) was a Czech priest, philosopher and reformer. He was burned at
the stake for challenging the Catholic Church on matters of the Eucharist and
other theological topics.
William Tyndale
(1494 – 1536) was an English scholar and a leading figure in the Protestant
Reformation. He is well known for his translation of the Bible into English. In
1536, Tyndale was convicted of Heresy and executed by strangulation. His body
was then burned at the stake.
Martin Luther
(1483 – 1546) was a German monk and a leader of the Protestant Reformation. He
is most famous for nailing his Ninety-Five Theses to the door of the Wittenberg
Chapel in1517 incurring the wrath of Pope Leo X. While he was not executed for
his crime of Heresy, he was excommunicated by the Pope (which still stands to
this day).
The
list goes on and on, but all these men had the courage to stand up against the
most powerful leaders of their day, endure the scorn of their fellow citizens
because they had arrived at conclusions counter to what had been set down by
orthodoxy. The passing of years has shown that most of what these men believed
is in fact closer to what Christ taught and what He had passed onto the
Apostles and Disciples.
While
organized religion has stepped in and Balkanized the works of Christ on the
Cross, there are still many good people amongst us who fight on, pointing out
error when it threatens to blot out the truth. These people may not have the
degrees or letters given to those who have chosen symbolism over substance, but
they clearly have the Spirit. Their beliefs as measured against the teachings
of Christ, not of man, stand firm. These were men—and women—who have given (and
will give) their lives so that the truth will always shine most brightly amidst
the crushing darkness of orthodoxy.
Am
I too critical of organized religion and those who have chosen a career in
theology? Not necessarily. Where I am critical is when one has decided to
conform to the orthodox teaching rather than challenge their instructors for
fear of being rejected. Despite my personal theological views and beliefs, I am
quite confident I possess sufficient theological knowledge to enter any
seminary and write a doctrinal thesis which would allow me to place a ThD at
the end of my name. This isn’t a pointless boast, it is merely a fact. However
to do such, I would have to compromise my beliefs. What seminaries expect and
what I would present are two different things. Regardless the notations,
citations and logical conclusions, I would be branded a heretic and expelled. I
know this and thus find the pursuit (at least for now) to be pointless.
Christ
came as a man to this earth to redeem humanity. One can only redeem what one
once possessed or is rightfully owned. The essence of what we as beings are,
our spirits—our essential construct came from God Almighty. Absent our fleshly
bodies, we are eternal spirits and Christ explained that we would have eternal
life with Him (Matthew 25:46, Romans 6:23). When we get bound up in doctrines
such were conceived to water down the Christ; when we will happily condemn our
fellow man for daring to challenge orthodox positions we have never bothered to
examine ourselves, who are we trying to impress? God?
“If
I speak in tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a
resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.” – 1st
Corinthians 13:1
“Love
is patient, love is kind. It does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude,
it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
Love does not delight in evil, but rejoices with truth. It always protects,
always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails.” – 1st
Corinthians 13:4-8
“But the fruit of the Spirit is
love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness and self-control.
Against such things there is no law.”
–
Galatians 5:22
If
one does not see their God manifest in the above verses via the teachings they’ve
learned, one is being called by the Spirit to dig deeper, to fall to their
knees and ask God for clarity and for truth—no matter the personal cost. I came
to this point in my walk many years ago and this was what I asked of Him. For
good or for ill, I believe He has answered my plea. It has not been an easy
road; walking against the tide never is. However I am well aware that I am in
excellent company. Trails were never blazed by those who chose to walk a path first
cleared by others.
Stepping
into the unknown is scary and I will not minimize that here. I have certainly
had my sleepless nights over what I believe, but until I am shown quite definitively
that I am in error, I intend to continue my studies and teachings as I have
come to understand them. It is what I have been called to do and regardless the
position of the modern-day Constantine’s,
I will push forward. Despite the screams of “Heretic!” screamed at me by the Inquisitors and their demand that I
recant, I must be true to what it is that Christ has called me to do. Today
this is a relatively benign task; there’s little my critics can do beyond hurl
invective. Tomorrow it may be a different story.
History
has always shown that the most virulent critics of the truth masquerade as
those who claim to be the true keepers of the truth. Thus Constantine and his
successors killed scores of people of all ages and stations over the centuries
for daring to cross him; thus the modern church has excommunicated and shunned
those who dared to ask questions which left them mute with rage. Is God really
visible in the faces of these Christians? Would an unbeliever see God when
looking at these children of His?
That
question can really only be answered by either God Himself, or those who have
found their hearts being pricked by my words. Such people know who they are and
so does God. One can attempt fool his fellow man, but there is nothing at all
hidden from God’s sight. Pride, ego … and fear are all laid bare before Him.
Heretic
or Disciple? It isn’t merely a matter of perspective if one is seeking to do
the will of God Almighty and follow His admonitions. As Christ said,
“If
the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first”. –John 15:18
No comments:
Post a Comment