The True Nature of Heresy

In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, one God. Amen

The True Nature of HeresyArchbishop +++ Chrysostomos of Etna

The term "heresy" is probably misused by Orthodox Christians—both zealots and so-called modernists alike—more than any other word in their religious vocabulary. Among the modernists, it has taken on the rôle of exposing the "ecumenical love" of which they so often talk for what it actually is. It is a term which these ecumenists disallow in their encounters with those of other confessions, since they reckon it outdated, old-fashioned, inappropriate, and improper. Yet they do not for a moment hesitate to apply it to us traditionalist Orthodox—who rightly point out the heresy (a very denial of the primacy of Orthodoxy) implicit in the religious syncretism that lies at the core of ecumenism—, attacking us with an acrimony that belies the real nature of ecumenism’s much-touted love and religious tolerance. Among certain Orthodox traditionalists—our particular concern here—the term is equally abused. It is frequently used as a kind of epithet that presumably rises above the law of love, above reason, and above theological precision itself. For theological amateurs sporting that moot but nasty "expertise" that all too often joins little thought to too much zeal, "heresy" is a handy tool with which to dispense with anything that seems amiss, according to their own peculiar scheme of things. It also becomes, not infrequently, a call to arms, inspiring virtual "witch hunts" in the name of cleansing or protecting the Church from error

A true understanding of the nature of heresy tells us how foreign all that we have described is to a genuine Orthodox mentality. St. Paul contrasts the heretic with those who are "careful to keep good works" in the Church, noting that the former is inevitably one who is preoccupied with "foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law." He also advises us that "a man that is an heretick" we should "reject, after the first and second admonition" (Titus 3:8-10). In his Epistle to the Galatians, the Apostle of the Nations again associates heresy with "wrath, strife," and "seditions," contrasting these things with the man of God, who is characterized by "love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness," and "faith" (5:20-22). All that St. Paul writes is contained within the consensus of the Orthodox Fathers concerning heresy. They teach that it has its roots, not in incorrect belief and teaching alone, but in a mean spirit and in persistence in one’s error, even after repeated entreaties that he repent. A devout believer can innocently misunderstand the teachings of the Church; this does not* make him a heretic. Indeed, one can be a schismatic and still not be a heretic. (See St. Nikodemos’ commentary on Canon I of St. Basil, Pedalion [The Rudder] [Thessaloniki, 1982], p. 589.)

These individuals become heretics when they succumb to stubborn self-opinion, contentiousness, and absolute tenacity, and only then, separated from the Church, are they "completely alienated from the Faith," in the words of St. Basil the Great (Canon I). Thus, St. Symeon of Thessaloniki, in his essay on heresy, tells us that "pride and haughtiness" are the "cause" of all heresies (Ta Apanta [Extant Works] [Thessaloniki, 1882], p. 27 Those who "hunt down" heretics, who create strife and discord in the Church by unfounded and supercilious accusations of heresy, and who act out of pride and wrath in condemning those who may innocently hold wrong beliefs—these very same individuals are acting within the spirit of heresy itself. A true Christian seeks to correct those in error, to lead them with love, and to avoid strife and discord. A true Christian does not seek out errors in others, but examines first his own shortcomings. And a true Christian, when he confronts a miscreant—one who willingly embraces heresy, defies the correction of the Church, and persists in his misbelief—, separates from that individual only in the spirit of self-preservation, so as to avoid the deadly bacterium of heresy. He shows rage, not towards the hapless heretics, but towards the heresy that has possessed them. He disassociates from the heretic and avoids his table, not because he ceases to pray for him and to grieve for his soul, but, once again, to avoid exposure to spiritual disease and, by his example and out of concern for them, to prompt others to do likewise. Any other spirit, even in the face of real heresy, leads the would-be zealot to something as bad as heresy itself, as St. Maximos the Confessor tells us, that is, the betrayal of the prime Christian commandment of love (Patrologia Graeca, Vol. XCI, col. 465C


It should also be noted that, while we have a canonical right, if not responsibility, as Orthodox Christians to separate from Hierarchs who teach heresy openly (with "bare heads," as the canons put it [see, for example, Canon XV of the First-and-Second Synod]) and refuse to recant for their misbelief, we have no personal right to dismiss those whom we sincerely and honestly believe to be at fault with sweeping condemnations and denunciations. We can clearly define their heresies, separate from them, advise others to do likewise, and maintain a resistant stance against their misbelief. But we cannot, in so doing, make ourselves the Church, deposing and anathematizing, simple individuals that we are, this-or-that person at will. Even if a local Church or a group of Bishops should do so, we must leave it to the Church to guide us, not our personal opinions. Otherwise, once again we fall to exalting our own opinions, which itself is one great step towards heresy. Moreover, when the Church issues statements against a heresy, it is readily cognizant of its responsibility to exercise "economy" in the case of those who unknowingly fall to misbelief, and it never issues its condemnations with the intention of destroying souls, but of awakening those in the dark sleep of error and bringing them to repentance. How distant this is from individuals who coldly take it upon themselves personally to seek out heretics, condemn them, and then delight in the wholly demonic "victory" of being "right" while others are "wrong."

We hear much today about who has and who does not have Grace. This is not the question which we must ask. It is simply ours to determine what is Orthodox, follow it, and be obedient to our right-believing Bishops, allowing them errors and human weaknesses. For, in fact, just as heresy has its roots in strife, right belief ultimately has its roots in obedience. This is simple to demonstrate. If those who today fall to the pan-heresy of ecumenism were simply obedient to the consensus of the Fathers—that is, that as Orthodox we must pray for but not with the heterodox—, then we would not be divided between ecumenists and traditionalists, New Calendarists and Old Calendarists, betrayers and the Faithful. Likewise, except when they preach or embrace heresy and refuse to correct themselves, as the so-called "official" Orthodox Hierarchy has for the most part done, we have no right to be disobedient to our Bishops and act as we think we should, fancying ourselves champions and confessors of the Faith. Nor should we take it on ourselves to decide with finality, as individuals, on the delicate question of where Grace exists and where it does not. We cannot personally and unilaterally declare this-or-that person or this-or-that Church heretical. We must follow our Synods and the Holy Spirit, Who acts through them, and let the Church speak for us. Otherwise, we will make of our resistance a mockery, dividing among ourselves and scandalizing the Faithful—a sad phenomenon that the Evil One has already widely used to compromise the contemporary resistance movement against ecumenism and modernism.

If it is not for amateurs and self-made experts to make pronouncements about complex matters of the Faith, it is also not for them to misuse and misapply such terms as "heresy" and "heretic." Since the Church acts with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, Who is God, and since God is Love, it alone can properly anathematize and denounce what is wrong, since even in such rejection it acts out of love, both protecting its faithful members and calling those whom it repudiates to repentance. The Church alone, once more, can exercise such love. As humans, even our best intentions and actions are fallen, bereft of true love, and often vindictive. Let us, then, separate from what we perceive to be wrong, turning not to personal opinion and haughty dependence on the self, but to the guidance of pious Bishops and to those Churches which have, in the words of one Father (St. Basil the Great, Patrologia Graeca, Vol. XXXI, col. 1540), entered into a "lawful struggle" against the ills of our age, which ills will undoubtedly lead to Antichrist

May the mercy our Lord Jesus Christ be with all Orthodox Christians, always

Chastity In Marriage - Orthodox Teachings

In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, one God. Amen

From The Clementine HomiliesHomily -Chap. XIII To Chap. XIX

CHAPTER XIII--PETER ON CHASTITY
That same evening we all enjoyed the benefit of Peter's instruction. Taking occasion by what had happened to our mother, he showed us how the results of chastity are good, while those of adultery are disastrous, and naturally bring destruction on the whole race, if not speedily, at all events slowly. "And to such an extent," he says, "do deeds of chastity please God, that in this life He bestows some small favour on account of it, even on those who are in error; for salvation in the other world is granted only to those who have been baptized on account of their trust in Him, and who act chastely and righteously. This ye yourselves have seen in the case of your mother, that the results of chastity are in the end good. For perhaps she would have been cut off if she had committed adultery; but God took pity on her for having behaved chastely, rescued her from the death that threatened her, and restored to her her lost children

CHAPTER XIV --PETER'S SPEECH CONTINUED
"But some one will say, 'How many have perished on account of chastity!' Yes; but it was because they did not perceive the danger. For the woman who perceives that she is in love with any one, or is beloved by any one, should immediately shun all association with him as she would shun a blazing fire or a mad dog. And this is exactly what your mother did, for she really loved chastity as a blessing: wherefore she was preserved, and, along with you, obtained the full knowledge of the everlasting kingdom. The woman who wishes to be chaste, ought to know that she is envied by wickedness, and that because of love many lie in wait for her. If, then, she remain holy through a stedfast persistence in chastity, she will gain the victory over all temptations, and be saved; whereas, even if she were to do all that is right, and yet should once commit the sin of adultery, she must be punished, as said the prophet

CHAPTER XV.--PETER'S SPEECH CONTINUED
"The chaste wife doing the will of God, is at good reminiscence of His first creation; for God, being one, created one woman for one man. She is also still more chaste if she does not forget her own creation, and has future punishment before her eyes, and is not ignorant of the loss of eternal blessings. The chaste woman takes pleasure in those who wish to be saved, and is a pious example to the pious, for she is the model of a good life. She who wishes to be chaste, cuts off all occasions for slander; but if she be slandered as by an enemy, though affording him no pretext, she is blessed and avenged by God. The chaste woman longs for God, loves God, pleases God, glorifies God; and to men she affords no occasion for slander. The chaste woman perfumes the Church with her good reputation, and glorifies it by her piety. She is, more over, the praise of her teachers, and a helper to them in their chastity

CHAPTER XVI --PETER'S SPEECH CONTINUED
"The chaste woman is adored with the Son of God as with a bridegroom. She is clothed with holy light. Her beauty lies well-regulated soul; and she is fragrant with ointment, even with a good reputation. She is arrayed in beautiful vesture, even in modesty. She wears about her precious pearls, even chaste words. And she is radiant, for her mind has been brilliantly lighted up. Onto a beautiful mirror does she look, for she looks into God. Beautiful cosmetics does she use, namely, the fear of God, with which she admonishes her soul. Beautiful is the woman not because she has chains of gold on her, but because she has been set free from transient lusts. The chaste woman is greatly desired by the great King; she has been wooed, watched, and loved by Him. The chaste woman does not furnish occasions for being desired, except by her own husband. The chaste woman is grieved when she is desired by another. The chaste woman loves her husband from the heart, embraces, soothes, and pleases him, acts the slave to him, and is obedient to him in all things, except when she would be disobedient to God. For she who obeys God is without the aid of watchmen chaste in soul and pure in body

CHAPTER XVII--PETER'SSPEECH CONTINUED
Foolish, therefore, is every husband who separates his wife from the fear of God; for she who does not fear God is not afraid of her husband. If she fear not God, who sees what is invisible, how will she be chaste in her unseen choice? And how will she be chaste, who does not come to the assembly to hear chaste-making words? And how could she obtain admonition? And how will she be chaste without watchmen, if she be not informed in regard to the coming judgement of God, and if she be not fully assured that eternal punishment is the penalty for the slight pleasure? Wherefore, on the other hand, compel her even against her will always to come to hear the chaste-making word, yea, coax her to do so

CHAPTER XVIII --PETER'SSPEECH CONTINUED
"Much better is it if you will take her by the hand and come, in order that you yourself may become chaste; for you will desire to become chaste, that you may experience the full fruition of a holy marriage, and you will not scruple, if you desire it, to become a father, to love your own children, and to be loved by your own children. He who wishes to have a chaste wife is also himself chaste, gives her what is due to a wife, takes his meals with her, keeps company with her, goes with her to the word that makes chaste, does not grieve her, does not rashly quarrel with her, does not make himself hateful to her, furnishes her with all the good things he can, and when he has them not, he makes up the deficiency by caresses. The chaste wife does not expect to be caressed, recognises her husband as her lord, bears his poverty when he is poor, is hungry with him when he is hungry, travels with him when he travels, consoles him when he is grieved, and if she have a large dowry, is subject to him as if she had nothing at all. But if the husband have a poor wife, let him reckon her chastity a great dowry. The chaste wife is temperate in her eating and drinking, in order that the weariness of the body, thus pampered, may not drag the soul down to unlawful desires. Moreover, she never assuredly remains alone with young men, and she suspects the old; she turns away from disorderly laughter, gives herself up to God alone; she is not led astray; she delights in listening to holy words, but turns away from those which are not spoken to produce chastity

CHAPTER XIX--PETER'SSPEECH ENDED
God is my witness: one adultery is as bad as many murders; and what is terrible in it is this, that the fearfulness and impiety of its murders are not seen. For, when blood is shed, the dead body remains lying, and all are struck by the terrible nature of the occurrence. But the murders of the soul caused by adultery, though they are more frightful, yet, since they are not seen by men, do not make the daring a whit less eager in their impulse. Know, O man, whose breath it is that thou hast to keep thee in life, and thou shalt not wish that it be polluted. By adultery alone is the breath of God polluted. And therefore it drags him who has polluted it into the fire; for it hastens to deliver up its insurer to everlasting punishment

The Saints

If I may quote an old statement by Pascal, in order to clarify it, I will distinguish that humans belong to three categories: the people of the world, the intellectual people [intelligentsia], and the people of love.

I understand that the people of the world savour their worldliness, this world's attractive belongings, and delicious goodies are tempting, and its pride is enjoyable. This world is their focal attraction and charm, but in the end, it becomes a mere distraction. This world reshapes a material face and substitutes the humane identity with mere belongings—through imbalance between what one really is and what he possesses—and forgetting, that the days may turn around, and we may loose what we possessed. Then we will simply disappear, after the disappearance of the joys we owned. The loss of belongings may seem to us an 'extinction', since our 'inward' soul was formed and shaped through the material 'outward'.
Money, in its abundance, is the rampart of power—in which case, if it led to arrogance—will consequently, lead to the destruction of others. Destruction begins through physical and ideological cancellation. The people of the world do not need 'others' to acknowledge their existence. Their own existence is the sole consequence of their own power, in a way that—the loss of their money—will trigger their own destruction. This fear [of loosing power] explains their greediness, their tyranny, and their suicide in some cases, for he who knows that his existence springs from a different fountain [other than his power] will never kill himself.
On the other hand, the intellectual people are no better, than those who proudly boast with their money, are. They felt [intellectual people] that the knowledge is an extensive existence—because they have put the world in their brain! Then, on a second stage, they possessed the world. They became the world. The pleasure of the book and art, through all its varieties, makes them feel they are constantly invading the unknown and realising themselves: This is why they believed they could change the world. Especially poets, dream about this change [of the world]. Who reads the poems? The educated—and the duties of the educated are a meaningless task—in my opinion. The intellectual people have the same nature of the people of the world. Yes, the intellectual people may have keenness, enthusiasm and openness — and all this may look like a footstep for a possible vision — but the vision, if not descended from above, will become a passion.

The people of love are the highest, unchallenged, beyond any measure. They have [the people of love] not only separated themselves from the world—but also despise much of what this world has to offer—without boasting against others. The people of love yield away education, for they have attained that which is inexplicable. But this does not mean that some of those loving people are not the most educated in their surrounding, and that they may be rich and intellectual—but the money, power and education is not their depth—because they have attained another depth: an irreproachable depth.

These are three ranks, the highest of which you will never reach through your own means. You can never ascend from money and power to erudition. The power, will never become knowledge, and the power-of-intellect will never become sanctity.

He, who yearns for the purity of heart, does not recall his family's genealogy —all this is dead for him—he doesn't pay any importance to his belonging to a noble house, even if he truly was. These 'houses' are all clay for him. He does not see his existence in those who became his relatives, and does not boast by those who he befriends. He doesn't even count himself a part of his family — because he did not emerge from this reality — in his eyes he is but nothing.
He, who felt himself weak, will need help. But he, who did not see himself existing, will not need any support. I am not setting up individuality against the lineage [in the tribal context], because individualism preaches that the individual is the whole and cancels the community. But he, who loves, does not see himself a separate member: he sees himself solely existing in his beloved. He only sets forth him who he loves. He comes. He is always in a state of 'coming'. And if he receives love back, he feels the grace: he, who grace descends upon, is never an 'owner'. The blessings transparently pass through him. The Grace returns back to its Donor, and the inspirer remains bare-naked. He fears his nakedness on Judgement Day. He does not understand how his God will reward him—since he never been anything: God only receives the poor.

But him, who will stand in front of his Creator with his hands-full, what shall he receive? And him, who stood in the Divine presence and felt his great intellect, what shall he understand up there? Maybe, poverty is our last resort up to Him.

This pretty, who will beautify her in front of the Creator? Who will bestow upon her the garment of splendour if she attained the doorstep, aware of her beauty? If all our righteousness were like the "filthy rags" as Isaiah said [Isa 64:6], what would then our beauty look like—except ugliness— in God's eyes?
Knowing that the Baal—the god of power—has died after the manifestation of the God of Righteousness, and that Ashtarout—the goddess of beauty—died among the Bedouins of Merriam. Every power had vanished and every sensation was evaporated: all idols fell down.
I knew that the goddess Artmiss was transformed to a wooden-stick when confronted by Apollon, and I thought that this goddess remained with a perpetual beauty. Until I learned at last, through a tableau by Tiepolo, that this same goddess of beauty did itself extinct, and that we are the victims of illusions. Illusions of our world, of pleasures, of what we've read, and of what we've inspired from the culture of today and also perhaps, of what we have inspired from all the cultures—until we may be freed—by putting-on the nakedness of Christ.

I don't think, if you were rich and illiterate, that you need to be educated in order to escape the foolishness of this world. Education is a power but is not a salvation. I fear upon you, from the power of education, and from your boasting against the simple [poor in spirit]. I do not despise the books, and I want both the ignorant and educated to study it, because the books may be used as a tool for service. Also, I do not despise the money, because you can transform it to a mean for consolation. The power itself may be handed to the saints and may become their way of benevolence. My call to you, is to realise that money and power are mere nothing if measured against the humble and righteous knowledge; my plea to you is to realise that all the heritage of this world is mere nothing in comparison with the residing love in the hearts.

I am not calling the beautiful to shave her hair and to extract her teeth to become ugly, as did a beautiful French girl when she felt that the great writer Leon Bloy started been attracted to her! As well, I am not calling the inhabitants of the palaces to desert their homes. For repentance is not from the beauty, but from the admiration of beauty, and repentance is not from the possession of money, but from the worship of money. And the fruits that consequently follow this repentance, are chastity, respect, benevolence, and meekness of charity.

I said that the sanctity is a grace. This is faith. Those who were sanctified told us, that it is a decision, a great effort following a life-long awareness and perseverance.
What is striking in our days, is that what was before the persistence: People no more believe in the Word of God; they do not believe that He is just in what He forbade us to do, and in what He called us to. They say, without being ashamed, that what the believers call a sin—is not really a sin! The 'feeble' believer—if such can be called—more and less, adores his sin. In the past he [the believer] use to fall in sin, and damn the devil for his slept… Today he commits a sin and boasts with it! He, no longer asks forgiveness — and if he had a bit of timidity not to justify his disobedience — he will then try to explain it by, what he calls, a 'need in the flesh', or his poor financial situation, or the riches of the table—in general, he speaks of an irresistible seduction. Sin died to become a psychological incident. This should explain this epidemic indifference towards sexual immorality, bribery, and fraud. The great fall is not in the sins—these [sins] always existed and will remain—but the greater plunge is in the denial of the concept of sin. What really threaten sanctity in our days, is not corruption, but the mixing [confusion] between good and evil—between black and white.

I am certain that, what attracts me the most in Christianity is not the theology, but the sanctity. All the books of theology, which were written by the great theologians, were only written because these theologians believed that the orthodoxy of faith is an unsubstantial part of the purity of heart. Similarly, the entire heritage of worship has the sole target of supporting our journey to righteousness. I know that all the Christian effort throughout the generations, through pondering, praying, counselling, and organising—had no other reason than to deify us. The 'obsession' of Christianity is to prove to its members and to the world that God can inhabit—despite all the difficulties—a human heart and transform him to shine with splendour. All the 'charisma' of Christianity, which cannot be expressed by words or tunes, is its ability to transform some faces to Icons. The miracle is that Christianity was able—among a number of people, which I don't know its percentage—was able to extinguish the passions in the character. Was able to restore the sweetness of living, the meekness, the transparency, the self-sacrificing for the others. Was able to initiate the total abolishment of the 'I', the abolishment of the tribal loyalty, and the abolishment of the worldly glory of the rite.
He Who came, and can come everyday and in every part of the world, can prove to you all the glories of your world to be meaningless, can reveal that all the books and arts of the world are dim if compared to the joy of the pure ones.

I do not deny anything of the beauty of this universe, and am strongly attracted to the magnificence of the knowledge. But those who are baptised by tears and who love Jesus the Nazarene in His nakedness, and who have attained His crucifixion through their sincerity and daily meekness. In my eyes they are greater than the light of the sun is, than the tenderness of flowers, than all the sensuality of the mind, and greater than the greatest poems are.
Those whom God, himself carved them by His finger, and planted them in this world of our misery witnesses to Him—are my proof to Him.
Because of them, I have closed all the books.

By Metropolitan George (Khodr) of Mount Lebanon