What Is Heresy? The Power Struggle.

From the dawn of time we came; moving silently down through the centuries, living many secret lives, struggling to reach the time of the Gathering; when the few who remain will battle to the last.

That’s a quote from Highlander (1986), a movie about a group of immortals destined (doomed) to fight and kill one another until only one is left. One by one, they all get killed off, many of them by Kurgan, the strongest of them all, who wants to bend the entire world to his evil desires. Eventually, the only two still standing are Kurgan and Connor MacLeod, the charming Scottish hero. And, of course, the movie ends with the titanic clash between them as they struggle to see who will be the One.

Because, in the end, there can be only one.

What does this have to do with heresy, you ask? Good question. There are actually two connections. First, after this movie, they made Highlander II, which was a heresy all by itself. But, second, and more pertinent for our purposes, many people understand the development of heresy in exactly the same way as Highlander.

The story goes like this. In the beginning there were many different kinds of Christianity. They weren’t better or worse, just different. And, in some other world, maybe they could have all gotten along. But not in this one.

In this world, there can be only one.

At least, that’s how one group viewed things. They simply couldn’t accept the fact that Christianity might come in different flavors. It was their way or nothing.

Unfortunately for the others, this group quickly grew in strength, numbers, and organization. They were the Borg of early Christianity, assimilating everything in sight. No one could stand against them. And, eventually, they were the only ones left. The others had fallen. And, they became the One.

But, even this wasn’t enough. They weren’t simply content with being the One. They wanted everyone to believe that they were destined to be the One all along. The others had been wrong even to try to stand against them. So, they re-told the story and re-wrote the books. And, in this new story, they were the Orthodox who held faithfully to the truth handed on from Jesus. All those who differed from or disagreed with them were the Heretics, who tried to dilute or distort the truth.

As they say, it’s the winners who write history. And, the Orthodox won.

This is a common way to view heresy today. Heresy isn’t really a thing-in-itself; it doesn’t have any essential characteristics that can help you identify it when it comes along. Heresy is simply a label that some dominant group applies to those it wants to dominate (or already has dominated). So, the statement, “You’re a heretic!”, isn’t really about things like truth or doctrine. It’s about power. Pure and simple.

Now, the first thing that we need to say about this approach is that there’s a lot of truth in it.

 1. The early church was diverse. Just look at the NT itself. The churches in Jerusalem, Antioch, Corinth, and Rome were very different. Peter, Paul, and John all spoke about Christianity in diverse ways. And, moving on from the NT, the diversity grows. Alexandria, Edessa, Ctesiphon, all developed ancient forms of Christianity that were noticeably different from what we associate with “orthodox” Christianity. So, however we tell the story, we can’t slip into a simplistic understanding of the early church, which assumes a single Christianity at the beginning, from which all other groups diverged. As with anything that involves humans, the truth is messier than that.

 2. The early church was far from perfect. God’s people are broken. We have been since the Garden. So, we should not be surprised that our story includes things we’d rather not see. And, the early church was no different. A close look shows the church involved in power struggles, personality clashes, manipulation, and maneuvering. In that way, they were just like us. (If you doubt, just think of some of the church business meetings you’ve attended.) So yes, the story of orthodoxy/heresy is also a story of power struggles.

 3. “Heresy” is often a power label. One of the concerns that people have with the label “heresy” today is that it often gets tossed around as a power play. Want to shut someone up? Call them a heretic. And, this is often the case. Labels have power. So, it’s easy to use them when we want to control (or end) a discussion/debate. It happens today, and I’m sure it happened then as well.

 So, there are some good things here we can learn from. But, ultimately I think this approach to defining heresy fails.

1. It sometimes relies on bad history. Most commonly, people associate the power of the orthodox party with the rise of the church in Rome and its consolidation under Constantine. (Thank you Walter Bauer.) The problem with this is that orthodoxy was well-established long before Constantine. Let’s be clear: Constantine did not create orthodoxy. He played an important role in the development of orthodoxy. But, he comes too late in the story to explain orthodoxy’s “victory.” Another common argument claims that in certain areas, “heretical” forms of Christianity developed first. They were the original forms of Christianity in those areas, with orthodoxy coming along later to squash these indigenous movements. Unfortunately for this view, there is relatively little evidence that this is true. With few exceptions, the existing evidence supports the idea that such “heretical” ideas came only after more orthodox approaches had already developed. Of course, people often argue that this is exactly what we should expect given that “the winners write the histories.” But, that’s simply to dismiss the existing evidence in favor of the story that you prefer. When lack of evidence becomes evidence, you’ve got a creative argument. But not a convincing one.

2. It overemphasizes diversity. Although we should embrace the existence of diversity in the early church, we can’t go overboard. Early Christian churches were not isolated communities that developed idiosyncratic forms of Christianity with little or no input from other churches. Instead, they all shared a common identity as “Christians,” and worked together to grow in their understanding of what that meant and how they should go about living as Christians in the world. Recent studies have demonstrated how extensively early Christians communicated, partnered, and networked with one another. That doesn’t eliminate diversity, but it does put it in context. It was diversity within a shared identity. And consequently, it was diversity with limits. Those limits were not well understood at first. But, everyone seemed to agree that you could go too far. And, they communicated constantly as they struggled to understand the implications of that idea.

3. It overemphasizes power. This probably fits under #1 as well, since it reflects a historical misunderstanding. The idea that any Christian group in the first few centuries had enough authority and power to oppress some other Christian community is anachronistic. That certainly became true later, but not in the beginning. We need to remember that early Christian groups were small, oppressed minorities within a larger Roman power-structure. They simply didn’t have the wherewithal to oppress others overtly.

4. It makes “heretics” the innocent victims. For this argument to work, the heretics have to be the poor victims crushed by the mean orthodox party. So, people often go out of their way to emphasize the good qualities of the heretical groups (i.e. they were egalitarian, open-minded, creative, etc.). But, the sad reality is that the heretics were no better (though probably no worse). They could be just as hierarchical, closed-minded, and oppressive as anyone else. If they eventually “lost,” it wasn’t because they were too nice to win.

So, wherever the concepts of orthodoxy and heresy came from, they aren’t simply labels that we apply to the winners and losers of some ecclesial power struggle. We should recognize the diversity and acknowledge the power struggles. But, there’s more to the story than this.

[This post is part of our series on “What is ‘Heresy’ and Who Is a ‘Heretic’?”]

You might also be interested in:

Comments

comments

6 Responses to “What Is Heresy? The Power Struggle.”

  1. the3inone October 3, 2011 at 12:23 pm #

    First off, I find it terribly ironic that “immortals” fight each other to the death…

    But on a serious note I believe you are totally correct in stating that “it was diversity within a shared identity.” I am usually discouraged by the divisions in the Church because I see diversity with differing identities. Our identity is key and our identities are interconnected with Christ and one another. The label “heretic” forces people outside their identity in Christ, and it is really sad.

  2. Heironymus Minoris October 3, 2011 at 7:46 pm #

    @Marc – what an eccentric and clever way to deepen the discussion. Bravo!

    @the3inone – So it is really sad to force modern day ‘Arians’ (not the same as Aryans please) to be challenged that they might be outside the contours of orthodoxy? Would it be a greater sadness if their salvation depended upon it and they were never challenged?

  3. Brian Gronewoller October 4, 2011 at 8:31 am #

    @Marc: I clicked on this the second I saw the Highlander picture. I saw the movie a few months ago and, after the first 30 seconds, knew that it was going to be one of the most amazing experiences of my life. I sat my computer next to me and created a “movie journal” of my first time watching the movie (it’s posted on my blog if you’re ever curious…one of the more fun posts I have ever written).

    Back to the issue at hand. I also liked the phrase “diversity within a shared identity.” I think that this is something that both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches have a better contemporary understanding of than most of the Protestant denominations that I am familiar with. Many of my fellow Protestants whom I see use the word ‘heresy’ seem to use it like a weapon – at its worst as a kind of Christian curse word to insult others and place them over those at whom they are volleying such verbal grenades.

    There is certainly a time to use the term ‘heresy’, but I have a feeling that it is not as often as it has probably been used this past week (if the early Church only publicly declared heretics a few times every 100 years, perhaps we should imitate their sparse use of it as well).

  4. Brian Gronewoller October 4, 2011 at 8:34 am #

    (Also, I love the way that you have handled the power struggle narrative. It is still one of the major narratives today, and certainly has some reasonable evidence for it. However, I find the evidence for the organic growth narrative much more compelling).

  5. the3inone October 4, 2011 at 4:54 pm #

    Perhaps I should respond by saying that it is Christ who separates the wheat from the chaff and not us.

  6. Nancy October 5, 2011 at 10:47 am #

    As we pass through the “mind renewal” portion (by far the longest) of our Christian journey, we all at one time or the other pick up bits and pieces of genuine heretical thought. I’m very glad that I’ve been “challenged” at times like these. A challenge, especially when combined with a prompting of the Holy Spirit, will lead us to investigate and consider our belief system on a matter. This is IMO always a good thing. This just might be one way the Holy Spirit separates the wheat from the chaff. Condemnation on the other hand is another matter altogether and is I believe paired with acts of the enemy.

Leave a Reply:

Gravatar Image