What Is Heresy?

W. Carl Ketcherside

[Page 39]

     The word "heresy" deserves special study by members of "The Church of Christ" because it has taken on a traditional meaning among its adherents which is at variance with the word of God. Our brethren have borrowed a leaf from the book of Rome and are following Thomas Aquinas rather than the apostles of Jesus Christ. In effect we have gone the hierarchy one better for with many of our brethren the mere expression of a different view than the party line is branded as "heresy." Thomas Aquinas was a little more charitable than the average preacher among us for as Addis and Arnold point out in their Catholic Dictionary:

     St. Thomas adds that this rejection of Catholic dogma must be deliberate and pertinacious, so that his teaching, which is that of all theologians, may he summed up in the following definition. A heretic is one who, having been baptized, and still professing himself a Christian, pertinaciously denies or doubts any of the truths

[Page 40]

that must be held by divine and Catholic faith.

     The whole idea that heresy is something taught or preached and that it consists of an opinion at variance with the dogmatic norm is a witches' brew from the smoking Romish cauldron. It resulted from the establishment of orthodoxy and creedalism, and was concocted to justify the gibbet, rack, stake and cross, as a means of discouraging dissenters and enforcing conformity. It has remained for "The Church of Christ" to add the crowning touch of infamy by rejecting as heretics men who hold a divergent view about such innocuous matters as cups, classes, colleges, the millennium, and a host of other things. Self-appointed judges, revelling in their feeble usurpation of power, have pronounced the sentence of heresy and quoted, "An heretic after the first and second admonition reject." In every instance it is such a judge who is the real heretic, but in our mixed up mess, and messed up mix, we have lived to see the day when every member of "The Church of Christ" is regarded as a heretic by those in another faction wearing that name.

     Frederic W. Farrar was a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge; Archdeacon and Canon of Westminster; and Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen of England. In his renowned work entitled "The Early Days of Christianity," he says:

     The word "heresy" though it is used in the Authorized Version to translate the hairesis of the New Testament, has not the same meaning...In the New Testament it comes to mean "a faction," and the sin condemned by the word is not the adoption of erroneous opinions, but the factiousness of the party spirit.

     Then this scholarly gentleman adds something which should make all of us think soberly and seriously.

     The word "heretic" has indeed been shamefully abused. It has again and again been applied in a thoroughly heretical, and worse than heretical manner, to the insight and inspiration of the few who have discovered aspects of truth hitherto unnoticed, or restored old truths by the overthrow of dominant perversions. A church can only prove its possession of life by healthy development. Morbid uniformity, enforced by the tyranny of a dominant sect, is the most certain indication of dissolution and decay. Since Christianity is many sided the worst form of heresy is the mechanical suppression of diversion from popular shibboleths. Every great reformer in turn, every discoverer of new forms or expressions of religious truth, every slayer of old and monstrous errors, has been called a heretic. When a new truth could not be refuted it was easy for the members of a dominant party to gratify their impotent hatred by burning him who had uttered it...But the real heretics were, in most cases, the supporters of ecclesiastical tyranny and stereotyped ignorance by whom these martyrs were tortured and slain.

     No less illustrious was a contemporary of Farrar, also a Fellow in Trinity College--Dr. J. B. Lightfoot. He had the added assistance of two very personal friends, B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, who were engaged in a joint recension of the Greek Testament during his career. The latter, together with W. A. Wright, Librarian of Trinity College, actually gave suggestions and made corrections before Lightfoot committed his works to print. It is especially noteworthy, therefore, that Lightfoot defines hairesis as parties or sects, as for example, in Galatians 5:20, where he says of the word, "A more aggravated form of dichostasiai, when the divisions have developed into distinct and organized parties."

     In An American Commentary on the New Testament, edited by Alvah Hovey, the occurrence of hairesis in 1 Corinthians 11:19, gives occasion for the following observation:

     "Heresies" is a transliteration, but not a translation of the Greek word, which has come over into English with a different meaning from its ordinary Greek, or New Testament meaning. It means, originally, a taking: then, introducing the idea of selection, the taking of what one desires and leaving the rest, election, choice; then, a chosen way of living or thinking; then a body of men choosing the same way of thinking or living; and finally, dissensions between different bodies of

[Page 41]

this kind. Its use in the N. T. is divided between the last two meanings, sects and their dissensions...In Titus 3:10, the word translated "heretic" means in the same way, one who causes division, a sectarian..."

     James Hastings, writes in his Dictionary of the Bible in the following words:

     The word "heresy" is never used in the N. T. in the technical sense in which we find it by the first quarter of the second century, as a doctrinal departure from the true faith of the church, implying a separation from its communion. The usual N. T. meaning of hairesis is simply a party, school, or sect; and sect is the word by which it is most frequently rendered.

     In A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, Ernest DeWitt Burton, Professor of N. T. Interpretation in the University of Chicago, has this to say of hairesis:

     In the N. T. it is always associated with the middle of the verb, and usually signifies a body of people holding a chosen set of opinions...The meaning "heresy," a doctrine at variance with that of the general body is not found in the New Testament.

     A heresy is a sect. A sect is a party formed for the purpose of separating some of God's children from the rest. Sects are formed by factionalists, those under the insidious influence of the party spirit. No one who is honestly mistaken about some matters of scriptural interpretation is a heretic. To be a heretic one must make a test of fellowship out of his opinion or interpretation and attempt to establish a party to promote or protect that view. No one is a heretic merely because he endorses or opposes classes, colleges, or individual cups. But if he draws a line of fellowship and refers to "cups churches," "Sunday school churches," or "college churches," as if those who hold such views are not members of the one body, he is heretical or sectarian in his attitude. The same can be said for the species of bigotry which leads men to brand as "Antis" those who are not members of their exclusive cliques and factions, and to disregard them as brethren.

     The current view of "heresy" held by a majority of those in the modern "Church of Christ" is not only without scriptural warrant or authority, but is inimical to the peace and harmony of the body of Christ, for many reasons, of which the following are but a few.

     1. It brands and stigmatizes humble seekers after truth whose character is above reproach and whose only crime is that they cannot concur in every view or opinion held by those who have assumed the role of infallible interpreters of the sacred scriptures.

     2. It assumes that each faction or party has an infallible interpretation of the word of God at the same time that it denies the possibility of an infallible interpreter. For example, no one has the right to enthrone as dogma any view of the millennium, and demand that all kow-tow to it in order to be recognized as loyal to Jesus Christ, in whose coming all believe. As an individual, one may retain any view of this matter which commends itself to his intellect and conscience, without sinning against God, but if he gives his allegiance to a party created to propagate that view in divisive fashion, he is heretical, not because of his view but because of his attitude and action.

     3. It makes real communication and interchange of ideas with other sincere students of the Word in the Christian realm virtually impossible. So long as we regard all others as heretics we cannot meet with them for significant re-study of our areas of difference, but we must confront them only to admonish them before rejecting them. This renders impossible any genuine spiritual encounter for common good. Such an approach precludes sharing in research with other humble souls and makes us the proud and self-righteous dispensers of orthodoxy. Others must sit and listen but dare not rise and speak.

     4. It breeds inconsistency of the worst kind. We are betrayed into rejecting those who have not attained unto a certain intellectual status at the same time that we receive those whose moral and

[Page 42]

ethical behavior is inferior. The result is that the criterion becomes one of concept rather than of conduct, in direct opposition to God's method of judging. Every faction tolerates and uses those who are far from exemplary in conduct at the same time that godly men are rejected simply because they cannot subscribe to partisan interpretations. It rejects those whom God receives and receives those whom God rejects.

     5. It denies the validity of the only law hound upon those in Christ Jesus--the law of love. It limits and restricts the real applicability of this law to those who conform to the party norm, and thus reduces it to a factional dispensation. If you doubt this, all you need to do is to read the various journals to learn that each has its own circumscribed "brotherhood" and each of these brotherhoods is composed of those who conform to the party test. All "brotherhoods" in "The Church of Christ" test one's worthiness by what he is against rather than by what he is for. Depending upon the party, one is "loyal" if opposed to orphan homes, Herald of Truth, classes, colleges, cups, fermented wine, women teachers, etc. In the aggregate the only thing upon which "The Church of Christ" in all of its parties and segments is agreed is its opposition to instrumental music in corporate worship. While each party within the alignment brands as "heretics" those who belong to the other factions, all of the factions join in denouncing as "heretics" those brethren in the Lord who use instrumental music! This is the only basis of unity upon which all of the factions can now stand. It is apparent that every member of "The Church of Christ" is a "heretic" in the eyes of some other members of "The Church of Christ"!

     1. Virtually every truth now accepted was once branded as "heresy." We are willing to give our lives now in defense of those things for which our fathers were once willing to take the lives of those who held them.

     2. Heresy is not the illegitimate child of truth but the unwanted offspring of orthodoxy. Truth never did produce "heresy" and orthodoxy never produced anything else.

     3. The charge of "heresy" never measures the mind of the one charged by the mind of Christ, but by the mind of the one who makes the charge. Thus we have a fallible and erring judge demanding infallible and inerrant thought of others.

     4. So long as philosophy and science reward men for thinking and religion, operating under the guise of Christianity, penalizes them for doing so, the first two will inevitably become the refuge of the brilliant while the latter becomes the resort of the mediocre.

     5. Until we can conceive of the body of Christ as being of sufficient magnitude to encompass, absorb and assimilate, every member in Christ on earth, we have not yet outgrown first century prejudices. We are merely substituting our twentieth century class distinctions of "Liberal and Conservative," "Pro and Anti," for the earlier "Jew and Greek" and "bond and free." In Christ Jesus none of these avail anything. It is the new creation that counts and that is all that counts.

     6. It is not essential that those of us who are in Christ Jesus resolve all of our differences; it is only necessary that we resolve all of our differences in Christ. Those who were in Christ were as much Jews or Gentiles, as much bond and free, as before, but none of these things availed in Christ. He is greater than any of our distinctions and differences. There was room in Christ for James, an orthodox Jew and a pillar of the church of the Messiah in Jerusalem,

[Page 43]

to teach Jewish converts to circumcise their children and keep the law, while Paul was teaching his Gentile converts among the churches of Christ to ignore both. The latter wrote that the three Jerusalem leaders in the synagogue of the Messianists "accepted Barnabas and myself as partners, and shook hands upon it, agreeing that we should go to the Gentiles while they went to the Jews." No problem that has ever plagued the heirs of the restoration movement can compare in explosive potential with that of circumcision.

     The fact that there did not come into existence "a circumcision church" and an "anti-circumcision church" ought to shame us to tears with our glib patter and partisan jargon about "Sunday school churches" and "anti-Sunday School churches"; or "instrumental churches" and "non-instrumental churches"; or "white churches" and "colored churches." God have mercy upon our tragic trifling with divine love and grace. We need to quit shaking fists at each other and shake hands as we go to our respective spheres of labor. It is far better to be known as brethren of the open hand, than to be regarded as brethren of the clenched fist!

     7.Once the true nature of divine revelation in love is fully grasped, there can never be another "heresy trial" among the saints of God. Such trials are "witch hunts" and are never prosecuted by seekers after truth. They are the instruments of self-appointed defenders of orthodoxy. No child of God should ever be made to suffer indignity or reprisal for any opinion honestly held, regardless of how wrong it may ultimately prove to be. Such a person must be tolerated and not persecuted.

     This does not mean there will not be heretics, for there will be, and these must always be rejected. But a heretic is a factional man and must never be thrust out for an opinion honestly held, but for factionalism. Such a man will not need to be tried for he is self-condemned. This is an essential feature of heresy as God regards it.

     8.Congregations are made up of individuals and will reflect the divergent views and interpretations of those who compose them. These, in turn, have formulated their views as a result of instruction given by fallible men, as well as from their own limited and fallible personal investigation of the revelation of God. When, therefore, in conformity with honest personal and corporate conscience, based upon convictions arrived at through teaching and study, they adopt those means which they deem best fitted to enable them to implement the commands of God, we should not brand such congregations as "dens of digression" or "hotbeds of heresy" for they are not such at all. Our own intemperate language may be a worse offense against God and provide a greater stumbling block than what the others are doing.

     If we believe the means adopted are inimical to the revealed purpose of God, we have several areas of responsibility. First, we must personally resist the adoption of that which our own conscience condemns. Second, we will establish dialogue with brethren who employ such means, but do so on a fraternal basis within an atmosphere of brotherly love to avoid enmity and strife. Third, we will never allow such discussions, regardless of how prolonged, to dissolve brotherly regard and relationship. Fourth, we will not permit our disagreement about such means to negate our labors together in other areas where there is agreement. We are united with anyone up to the point of disagreement and we should make our unity as vital and vocal as our disunity. This is essential if we are to employ the full force of Christian witness in our impact upon the neo-pagan world which surrounds us all, regardless of our position on cups, classes, colleges, orphan homes, or the millennium. We need to know who our real enemies are!

     9. If we are to enact the role of peacemakers and thus be called the children of God, we must approach every case of division in the Christian realm with the attitude that we will not widen the gap if we cannot narrow the chasm. This means that if we discuss points at issue

[Page 44]

day and night for a week and reach an apparent stalemate, we must leave with at least as much respect for each other as we had at the outset. We must not only give men time, but allow the Holy Spirit an opportunity to penetrate and break up the fallow ground of our hearts with the plowshare of destiny. In many cases, this strategy of peace will necessitate postponement of initial discussion of controverted points until a more propitious occasion. In no case can the strategy work if we approach the conference with a view that the other brethren are heretics, for we are pre-conditioned by the scriptures to a rejection of heretics, and no ground of acceptance of one another can be found.

     10. Partisan debates, such as are generally held, will not solve brotherhood problems. They are conducted in an atmosphere of tension more conducive to enlargement of differences than to lessening them. They seldom result in unification of brethren although frequently they encourage division through rivalry. If a man is a heretic nothing will be gained by publicly debating him; if he is not, everything may be gained by not doing so. However, since I intend to discuss this feature more at length in a subsequent issue, I will presently defer further expression relative to the subject.

     We are guilty of loose and intemperate speech when we indiscriminately brand other saints of God as heretics, apostates and false teachers. This is not consistent with the admonition to "speak not evil one of another, brethren." Let us employ the "cloak of love" to cover the imperfections of those who can do no better than they know to do.

     To all who have been so patient and kind as to read thus far we express our gratitude and thanksgiving. "Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen."