Early Christian Heresies

The word heresy comes from haeresis, a Latin transliteration of the Greek word meaning choosing, choice, course of action, or in an extended sense school of thought.  Irenaeus (b. between the years 115 – 125 according to some, or 130 – 142,  d. 202) defined heresy as deviation from the standard of sound doctrine.

Historical examination of heresies focuses on a mixture of theological, spiritual, and political underpinnings to explain and describe their development. For example, accusations of heresy have been leveled against a group of believers when their beliefs challenged, or were seen to challenge, Church authority. Some heresies have also been doctrinally based, in which a teaching were deemed to be inconsistent with the fundamental tenets of orthodox dogma.

Irenaeus was the first to argue that his “orthodox” position was the same faith that Jesus gave to the apostles, and that the identity of the apostles, their successors, and the teachings of the same were all well-known public knowledge. This was therefore an early argument supported by apostolic succession. Irenaeus first established the doctrine of four gospels and no more, with the synoptic gospels interpreted in the light of John. Irenaeus’ opponents, however, claimed to have received secret teachings from Jesus via other apostles which were not publicly known. Gnosticism is predicated on the existence of such hidden knowledge, but brief references to private teachings of Jesus have also survived in the canonic Scripture as did warning by the Christ that there would be false prophets or false teachers. Irenaeus’ opponents also claimed that the wellsprings of divine inspiration were not dried up, which is the doctrine of continuing revelation.

The first known usage of the term ‘heresy’ in a civil legal context was in 380 AD by the “Edict of Thessalonica” of Theodosius I. Prior to the issuance of this edict, the Church had no state sponsored support for any particular legal mechanism to counter what it perceived as ‘heresy’. By this edict, in some senses, the line between the Christian Church and the Roman State was blurred. One of the outcomes of this blurring of Church and State was a sharing of State powers of legal enforcement between Church and State authorities. At its most extreme reach, this new Church authority of legal enforcement gave Church leaders the power to pronounce the death sentence upon those whom they might perceive to be ‘heretics’.

The study of heresy requires an understanding of the development of orthodoxy and the role of creeds in the definition of orthodox beliefs. Orthodoxy has been in the process of self-definition for centuries, defining itself in terms of its faith and changing or clarifying beliefs in opposition topeople or doctrines that are perceived as incorrect. The reaction of the orthodox to heresy has also varied over the course of time; many factors, particularly the institutional, judicial, and doctrinal development of the Church, have shaped this reaction. Heresy remained an officially punishable offense in Roman Catholic nations until the late 18th century. In Spain, heretics were prosecuted and punished during the Counter-Enlightenment movement of the restoration of the monarchy there after the Napoleonic Era.

The  Judaizers

The ongoing Christian debate over Judaizing in Christianity or Biblical law in Christianity began in the lifetime of the apostles, notably at the Council of Jerusalem, and parallels the ongoing debate about Paul of Tarsus and Judaism and the Protestant views of the Ten Commandments.

There is also a parallel to the debate within first and second century Judaism as to the place of Gentiles with regard to the Torah. The outcome of that debate was that Rabbinic Judaism determined that gentiles need only follow a small subset of the Torah, called the c to be assured of a place in the world to come.

It is widely held that Paul accused Judaizers of teaching that observance of the Abrahamic ritual was necessary to be justified and hence saved, i.e. Legalism. These groups taught that Gentile followers of Jesus needed to become Jewish proselytes and by so doing also observe the various requirements of the written Torah and oral Torah.

According to Eusebius’  the first 15 Bishops of Jerusalem were “of the circumcision”, although this in all likelihood is simply stating that they were Jewish Christians (as opposed to Gentile Christians). The issue was an early source of controversy in the church of and came to a head during the Council of Jerusalem. According to the account given in Acts 15, it was determined that Gentile converts to Christianity did not have to go through the proselyte ritual to secure a place in the World to Come; but in addressing the second question as to whether or not they should obey the Torah they encouraged the Gentiles to “abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication,” in order for the Gentiles to be able to immediately participate in Jewish community:

For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath. (Acts 15:22)

The expectation was that the Gentiles, upon immediately renouncing their idolatrous practices and ways (the four prohibitions), could now get through the door of a synagogue and hence learn the rest of Torah in the synagogues where they were still expected to attend.

Paul also addressed this question in his Epistle to Galatians in which he condemned those who insisted that the proselyte ritual had to be followed for justification as “false believers” (Galatians 2:4):

But even Titus, who was with me, was not compelled to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. But because of false believers secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might enslave us — we did not submit to them even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might always remain with you. And from those who were supposed to be acknowledged leaders (what they actually were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality) — those leaders contributed nothing to me. On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel for the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel for the circumcised (for he who worked through Peter making him an apostle to the circumcised also worked through me in sending me to the Gentiles), and when James and Cephas and John, who were acknowledged pillars, recognized the grace that had been given to me, they gave to Barnabas and me the right hand of fellowship, agreeing that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. They asked only one thing, that we remember the poor, which was actually what I was eager to do. [. . .] “We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners” – yet we know that a person is justified not by the group requirements for getting “in” to the Jewish family through the proselyte ritual, but through faith in Jesus Christ! And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by becoming Jewish according to the way of Jewish authorities, because no one will be justified by becoming Jewish in the way proscribed by the Jewish authorities. (Galatians 2:3-9, 15-16 NRSV)

Also Paul warned the early Galatian church that Gentile Christians who submit to the laws of  Torah will be alienated from Christ:

5:2 Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. 5:3 And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. 5:4 You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.” (Galatians 5:2-4).

The Epistle to Titus 1:11, often attributed to Paul, is, according to some Biblical scholars, also a condemnation of these practices.  The influence of the Judaizers in the church diminished significantly after the destruction of Jerusalem, when the Jewish-Christian community at Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans during the Great Jewish Revolt.

However, Christian groups following Jewish practices did not completely vanish, although they had been designated by the Catholic Church as heretical by the 5th century. Old Testament practices are still practiced among Gentiles to this day, including. The Coptic churches practice circumcision, but this may reflect ancient Egyptian influence or be a response to the culture of the Islamic majority. In Torah-submissive Christian groups which include the Ethiopian Orthodox church, dietary laws and Saturday Sabbath are observed as well.

Montanism

Montanism was an early Christian movement of the early 2nd century, named after its founder Montanus. It originated at Hierapolis where Papias was bishop and flourished throughout the region of Phrygia, leading to the movement being referred to as Cataphrygian (meaning it was “from Phrygia”) or simply as “Phrygians”. It spread rapidly to other regions in the Roman Empire at a time before Christianity was generally tolerated or legal.

Scholars are divided as to when Montanus first began his prophecy, having chosen dates varying from c. AD 135 to as late as AD 177. Montanus traveled among the rural settlements of Asia Minor after his conversion, and preached and testified what he purported to be the Word of God; however, his teachings were regarded as heresy by the orthodox Church for a number of reasons.

He claimed to have received a series of direct revelations from the Holy Spirit. In some of his prophecies Montanus spoke in the first person as God. Many casual readers and even many uninformed scholars such as church father Cyril of Jerusalem have misinterpreted this as Montanus claiming to be God or the Holy Spirit. However, scholars of Montanism agree that these words of Montanus exemplify the general practice of religious prophets to speak as the passive mouthpieces of the divine, and to claim divine inspiration (similar to modern prophets stating “Thus saith the Lord”). That practice occurred in Christian as well as in pagan circles with some degree of frequency. Montanus was accompanied by two women, Prisca, sometimes called Priscilla, and Maximilla, who likewise claimed the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. As they went, “the Three” as they were called, spoke in ecstatic visions and urged their followers to fast and pray, so that they might share these personal revelations. His preachings spread from his native Phrygia (where he proclaimed the village of Pepuza as the site of the New Jerusalem) across the contemporary Christian world, to Africa and Gaul.

The beliefs of Montanism are presented by an Orthodox historian as follows:

- The belief that the prophecies of the Montanists superseded and fulfilled the doctrines proclaimed by the Apostles.

- The encouragement of ecstatic prophesying, contrasting with the more sober and disciplined approach to theology dominant in Orthodox Christianity at the time and since.

- The view that Christians who fell from grace could not be redeemed, also in contrast to the orthodox Christian view that contrition could lead to a sinner’s restoration to the church.

- A stronger emphasis on the avoidance of sin and church discipline than in Orthodox Christianity. They emphasized chastity, including forbidding remarriage, and even the dissolution of some marriages, in particular, their prophetesses abandoned their husbands.

- Some of the Montanists were also “Quartodeciman” (“fourteeners”), preferring to celebrate Easter on the Hebrew calendar date of 14 Nisan, regardless of what day of the week it landed on. Orthodox Christians held that Easter should be commemorated on the Sunday following 14 Nisan. (Trevett 1996:202)

- Montanus provided salaries for those who preached his doctrine, which orthodox Christianity forbids.

- Their prophets dyed their hair, stained their eyelids, and were allowed to play with tables and dice and lend on usury.

Although orthodox Nicene Christianity prevailed against Montanism within a few generations, labeling it a heresy, the sect persisted in some isolated places into the 8th century. Some people have drawn parallels between Montanism and modern Pentecostalism (which some call Neo-Montanism). The most widely known Montanist was undoubtedly Tertullian, who was the foremost Latin church writer before he converted to Montanism.

The most widely known defender of Montanists was undoubtedly Tertullian, onetime champion of orthodox belief, who believed that the new prophecy was genuine and began to fall out of step with what he began to call “the church of a lot of bishops” (On Modesty). A letter of Jerome to Marcella, written in 385, refutes the claims of Montanists that had been troubling her (letter 41)

A group of “Tertullianists” continued to exist at Carthage. The anonymous author of Praedestinatus records that a preacher came to Rome in 388 where he made many converts and obtained the use of a church for his congregation on the grounds that the martyrs to whom it was dedicated had been Montanists. He was obliged to flee after the victory of Theodosius I. Augustine records that the Tertullianist group dwindled to almost nothing in his own time, and finally was reconciled to the church and handed over their basilica. It is not certain whether the Tertullianists were Montanist or not. In the sixth century, at the orders of the emperor Justinian, John of Ephesus led an expedition to Pepuza to destroy the Montanist shrine there, which was based on the tombs of Montanus, Priscilla and Maximilla.

Marcionism

Marcionism is an Early Christian dualist belief system that originates in the teachings of Marcion of Sinope at Rome around the year 144. Marcion believed Jesus Christ was the savior sent by God and Paul of Tarsus was his chief apostle, but he rejected the Hebrew Bible and Yahweh. Marcionists believed that the wrathful Hebrew God was a separate and lower entity than the all-forgiving God of the New Testament. This belief was in some ways similar to Gnostic Christian theology; notably, both are dualistic.

Marcionism, similar to Gnosticism, depicted the Hebrew God of the Old Testament as a tyrant or demiurge (see also God as the Devil). Marcion was labeled as gnostic by Eusebius. Marcion’s canon consisted of eleven books: A gospel consisting of ten chapters from the Gospel of Luke edited by Marcion (the current canonical Gospel of Luke has 24 chapters); and ten of Paul’s epistles. All other epistles and gospels of the 27 book New Testament canon were rejected.

Paul’s epistles enjoy a prominent position in the Marcionite canon, since Paul is credited with correctly transmitting the universality of Jesus’ message. Other authors’ epistles were rejected since they seemed to suggest that Jesus had simply come to found a new sect within broader Judaism. Religious tribalism of this sort seemed to echo Yahwism, and was thus regarded as a corruption of the Heavenly Father’s teaching.

Marcionism was denounced by its opponents as heresy, and written against, notably by Tertullian, in a five-book treatise Adversus Marcionem, written about 208. However, the strictures against Marcionism predate the authority, claimed by the First Council of Nicaea in 325 and the Edict of Thessalonica of 380, to declare what is heretical against the Church. Marcion’s writings are lost, though they were widely read and numerous manuscripts must have existed. Even so, many scholars (including Henry Wace) claim it is possible to reconstruct and deduce a large part of ancient Marcionism through what later critics, especially Tertullian, said concerning Marcion.

Marcion probably established a recognizable movement while still in the east; the Chronicle of Edessa gives the not implausible date of 138. He presently came to Rome, where he soon aroused high-level opposition (Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp, records a scathing remark made by Polycarp to Marcion), ending with Marcion’s excommunication in 144. He returned to Sinope, where he continued to advocate his kind of Christianity, evidently with considerable success. The story that he left Sinope because of his seduction of a young girl, or that, once he had returned there, he sought readmission to the Roman church by promising to convert those he had earlier misled, are standard-issue propaganda tales, and need not detain us here.

Marcion, in his lifetime and for centuries afterward, was a clearly an influential figure, but one whose position was not in the end constitutive for Christian doctrine. Things had gone too far in the other direction, and Marcion’s popularity with believers throughout Christendom availed him nothing against the opposition of the leaders in Rome. The eventual equilibrium point between Christianity and its Jewish roots turned out to be the “New Israel” theory, not Marcion’s “No Israel” theory. The Jewish roots continued to support the Christian tree.

Marcion was among the first renowned heretics in the history of the early church. His alternative interpretation of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ helped inspire the notion that certain theologies should be sanctioned as orthodox, while others should be condemned as heresy – a previously unacquainted term within ecclesial circles. Reacting to the popularity of Marcion’s newfound sect, the Catholic Church set out to systematize a set of beliefs that encompassed the entirety of orthodox Christianity. Marcionism is thus viewed as a catalyst for the development of the New Testament canon, the establishment of church law, and the structuring of the Catholic Church with its orthodox dogmas in general which remained a relatively unchallenged mainstay in Christendom until the Protestant Reformation.

Valentinianism

According to Irenaeus, the Valentinians believed that at the beginning there was a Pleroma, also known as the ‘fullness’. At the centre of the Pleroma was the primal Father or Bythos, the beginning of all things who, after ages of silence and contemplation, projected thirty Aeons, heavenly archetypes representing fifteen syzygies or sexually complementary pairs. Among them was Sophia. Sophia’s weakness, curiosity and passion lead to her fall from the Pleroma and the creation of the world and man, both of which are flawed. Valentinians identified the God of the Old Testament as the Demiurge, and was perceived as the imperfect creator of the material world. Man, the highest being in this material world, participates in both the spiritual and the material nature, and the work of redemption consists in freeing the higher from its servitude to the lower. One needed to recognize the Father, the depth of all being, as the true source of divine power in order to achieve gnosis (knowledge). The Valentinians believed that the attainment of this knowledge by the human individual had positive consequences within the universal order and contributed to restoring that order, and that gnosis, not faith, was the key to salvation. Clement wrote that the Valentinians regarded Catholic Christians “as simple people to whom they attributed faith, while they think that gnosis is in themselves. Through the excellent seed that is to be found in them, they are by nature redeemed, and their gnosis is as far removed from faith as the spiritual from the physical”

The superstructure of the celestial system, the celestial world of Aeons, is here developed in the most complicated way. These Aeons belong to the purely ideal, noumenal, intelligible, or supersensible world; they are immaterial, they are hypostatic ideas. Together with the source from which they emanate they form the Pleroma. The transition from the immaterial to the material, from the noumenal to the sensible, is brought about by a flaw, or a passion, or a sin, in the female Aeon Sophia.

In Valentinianism, Sophia always stands absolutely at the center of the system, and in some sense she seems to represent the supreme female principle.  Sophia is the youngest of the Aeons. Observing the multitude of Aeons and the power of begetting them, she hurries back into the depth of the Father, and seeks to emulate him by producing offspring without conjugal intercourse, but only projects an abortion, a formless substance. Upon this she is cast out of Pleroma and into the primal sub-stratum of matter. In the Valentinian systems, the fall of Sophia appears in double guise. The higher Sophia still remains within the upper world after creating a disturbance, and after her expiation and repentance; but her premature offspring, Sophia Achamoth, is removed from the Pleroma, and becomes the heroine of the rest of the drama. This fallen Sophia becomes a world creative power.

Next to Sophia stands a male redeeming divinity. In the true Valentinian system, the Christ is the son of the fallen Sophia, who is thus conceived as an individual. Sophia conceives a passion for the First Father himself, or rather, under pretext of love she seeks to draw near to the unattainable Bythos, the Unknowable, and to comprehend his greatness. She brings forth, through her longing for that higher being, an Aeon who is higher and purer than herself, and at once rises into the celestial worlds. Christ has pity on the abortive substance born of Sophia and gives it essence and form, whereupon Sophia tries to rise again to the Father, but in vain. In the enigmatic figure of Christ we again find hidden the original conception of the Primal Man, who sinks down into matter but rises again.

In the fully developed Ptolemaean system we find a kindred conception, but with a slight difference. Here Christ and Sophia appear as brother and sister, with Christ representing the higher and Sophia the lower element. When this world has been born from Sophia in consequence of her sin, Nous and Aletheia, two Aeons, by command of the Father, produce two new Aeons, Christ and the Holy Ghost; these restore order in the Pleroma, and in consequence all Aeons combine their best and most wonderful qualities to produce a new Aeon (Jesus, Logos, Soter, or Christ), the “First Fruits” whom they offer to the Father. And this celestial redeemer-Aeon now enters into a marriage with the fallen Aeon; they are the “bride and bridegroom.” It is boldly stated in the exposition in Hippolytus’s Philosophumena that they produce between them 70 celestial angels.

This myth can be connected with the historic Jesus of Nazareth by further relating that Christ, having been united to the Sophia, descends into the earthly Jesus, the son of Mary, at his baptism, and becomes the Saviour of men.

Valentinus (Valentinius- c.100 – c.160) was the best known and for a time most successful early Christian gnostic theologian. He founded his school in Rome. According to Tertullian, Valentinus was a candidate for bishop but started his own group when another was chosen. Valentinus produced a variety of writings, but only fragments survive, largely those embedded in refuted quotations in the works of his opponents, not enough to reconstruct his system except in broad outline. His doctrine is known to us only in the developed and modified form given to it by his disciples.

A new field in Valentinian studies opened when the Nag Hammadi library was discovered in Egypt in 1945. Among the very mixed bag of works classified as gnostic was a series of writings which could be associated with Valentinus, particularly the Coptic text called the Gospel of Truth which bears the same title reported by Irenaeus as belonging to a text by Valentinus. It is a declaration of the unknown name of the Father, possession of which enables the knower to penetrate the veil of ignorance that has separated all created beings from the Father, and declares Jesus Christ as Savior has revealed that name through a variety of modes laden with a language of abstract elements.