Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy: Finding the Way to Christ in a Complicated Religious Landscape by Ancient Faith Publishing

ORTHODOXY and HETERODOXY Finding the Way to Christ in a Complicated Religious Landscape

Second Edition

Revised and Expanded Andrew Stephen Damick

ancient faith publishing 3 chesterton, indiana

Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy: Finding the Way to Christ in a Complicated Religious Landscape (revised edition) Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick First edition—Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy: Exploring Belief Systems Through the Lens of the Ancient Christian Faith Copyright ©2011 by Andrew Stephen Damick All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the Publisher. Published by: Ancient Faith Publishing A Division of Ancient Faith Ministries P.O. Box 748 Chesterton, IN 46304 Unless otherwise noted, Scripture quotations are taken from the New King James Version, © 1979, 1980, 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. ISBN: 978-1-944967-17-8 Printed in the United States of America

For Nicole and in memory of The Rev. Dr. Matthew J. Baker (1977â&#x20AC;&#x201C;2015)

Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

Contents Foreword. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Preface to the Revised Edition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Preface to the First Edition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Introduction: Doctrine Matters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 The Truth Business 4 29 The Goal of Religion 4 31 The Nature of Truth 4 33 Some Technical Terms 4 35 A Brief Overview of Christian History 4 36 One: Orthodoxy, Heterodoxy, Heresy, and History . . . . . . . . . . 39 How the Orthodox Church Views the Non-Orthodox 4 39 Essentials of Orthodox Christian Doctrine 4 43 The Holy Trinity 43 Jesus Christ 44 Salvation and the Church 44 Major Historical Heresies 4 45 Two: Roman Catholicism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Did the Great Schism Produce a New Religion? 4 52 The Great Schism 4 53 Differences in Vision 4 54 Development of Doctrine 55 Faith and Reason 57 Spirituality 58 The Papal Dogmas 4 60 Papal Supremacy 60 Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

Papal Infallibility 66 A Different God? 4 69 The Filioque 69 Absolute Divine Simplicity 72 Created Grace 74 Salvation 4 76 Salvation of Non-Catholics 76 Original Sin 78 The Immaculate Conception 81 Merit and Satisfaction 83 Purgatory and Indulgences 86 Sacramental Validity 4 90 Closer Yet Further Apart: Theology, Liturgics, and Reunion 4 94 Three: The Magisterial Reformation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 The End of Roman Catholic Europe 4 99 The Five Solas 4 100 Sola Scriptura 101 Sola Fide 108 Sola Gratia 111 Solus Christus 112 Soli Deo Gloria 114 Magisterial Reformation Denominations 4 115 Lutheranism 115 The Reformed Churches 119 Anglicanism and its Heirs 126 Common Ground: What Might Have Been 4 129 Four: The Radical Reformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 The End of Ecclesiology 4 133 Pietism 135 Antinomianism 138 Scripture and Tradition 139 Anti-Clericalism and Anti-Sacramentalism 142 Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Believers’ Baptism 144 The Great Apostasy 146 The Invisible Church 149 Repudiation of Core Dogma 150 Denominational Families and Movements 4 152 Anabaptists 152 Moravians 154 Puritans 156 Quakers and Shakers 157 Baptists 158 Common Ground 4 159 Five: Evangelicalism and Revivalism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 The End of Liturgy 4 162 The Great Awakenings 4 164 The New Gnostics? 4 166 Individualism 169 Faith as Knowledge 174 Dualism 177 Escapism 182 Experience and Enthusiasm 185 Denominational Families and Movements 4 187 Restorationism 188 Adventism 191 The Holiness Movement 192 Dispensationalism 194 Liberalism and Fundamentalism 195 The Mega-Church Movement 196 The Future of Evangelicalism 4 198 The Emerging Church 199 The Missional Movement 201 New Calvinism: The Young, Restless, and Reformed 202 Ancient Future: Evangelical Appropriation of Tradition 204 Conclusions 4 207 Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

Six: Pentecostalism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 The Latter Rain 4 209 Origins in the Holiness Movement 4 210 “A Mighty Wave of Salvation” 4 215 The Apostolic Faith Movement 216 The Azusa Street Revival: The Spread of Pentecostalism 221 The Charismatic Movement 4 226 Third Wave Pentecostalism 4 229 The Word of Faith Movement 4 232 The “Grandfather” of Word-Faith 233 Faith Healing Goes Mainstream 234 Word-Faith Takes Shape 235 The Prosperity Gospel 239 Practices, Concepts, and Characteristics of Pentecostalism 4 241 The Second Pentecost 242 Speaking in Tongues 244 Faith Healing 247 Prophecy 250 Anointing 252 Spectacle and Celebrity 253 Touch Not the Lord’s Anointed 254 Is this Real? Pentecostals and Orthodoxy 4 256 Seven: Non-Mainstream Christians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 Many Gods, Many Christs 4 259 Unitarian Universalists 4 261 Swedenborgianism (New Church) 4 265 Mormonism 4 268 Christadelphians 4 278 Christian Science 4 281 Unity Church 4 284 Jehovah’s Witnesses 4 285 Davidian Seventh-day Adventists, Branch Davidians, and Church of God General Conference 4 290 Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Armstrongism (Worldwide Church of God) 4 292 The Way International 4 296 Unification Church (“Moonies”) 4 298 The Family International 4 303 A Course in Miracles 4 306 Conclusions 4 308 Eight: Non-Christian Religions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 Many Paths, Many Destinations 4 310 Judaism 4 312 Islam 4 315 Druze, Alawites, and Alevi 4 321 Zoroastrianism 4 323 Mandaeism 4 326 Yazdanism: Yazidi and Yarsan 4 328 Baha’i Faith 4 330 Hinduism 4 332 Buddhism 4 335 Jainism 4 338 Sikhism 4 340 Shinto and Other Animism 4 341 Cao Dai 4 344 Modern Western Religions 4 346 Santeria 346 Rastafarianism 348 Neo-Gnosticism 349 Neo-Paganism and Wicca 350 Scientology 352 Cargo Cults 4 355 Conclusions 4 356 Epilogue: Relations with the Non-Orthodox. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358 Appendix I: Atheism and Agnosticism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369 Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

Appendix II: How and Why I Became an Orthodox Christian. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373 Appendix III: Orthodoxy Quick Reference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385 Appendix IV: Heresy Quick Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387 Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397

Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. (1 Corinthians 1:10)

Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

Foreword

riting a foreword is always a great honor. It is a special joy, though, when the foreword is for a book written by one of the contributor’s former students. I have known Father Andrew for a long time—as an excellent writer, a sound theologian, and an ardent sharer of his faith. We live in a society that is influenced by a myriad of different Christian denominations and non-Christian faith traditions. Such an array of religions often leaves us confused and perplexed. Unlike the majority of Orthodox Christians around the globe, who live in traditionally Orthodox countries, we living in the Western lands are faced with an experience that compares to none, except perhaps the experience of the early Christians. Those first followers of “the Way” found themselves in a Greco-Roman world full of numerous sects and religions. And like us, many Romans explored religions and practices that were not traditional—not held by their forebears. And just as in our world today, religious syncretism was common. This is why Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy is a much-needed resource. It is valuable for Orthodox Christians and for the non-Orthodox, for the well-read and the novice. Fr. Andrew Stephen Damick offers a book that can help remedy the ignorance to which many of us must admit with regard to other religious traditions. As Orthodox Christians, we need to familiarize ourselves with the beliefs and practices of others so that we can better share our own Faith. A key to effective communication is not only knowing your subject matter, but knowing your audience as well. What is more, the exercise of learning about other faiths gives us a more refined context in which to better understand our own—a context that serves as the background from which the foreground can emerge all the more clearly. Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at 13 http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY The aim of this book is not triumphalistic, nor is it even an apologetic for the Orthodox faith. It is rather an expedition across the religious landscape of our society that holds our spiritual homeland—the Orthodox faith—as a touchstone to which we can compare and contrast all that we encounter. For this reason, Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy can also be useful for that religious or self-identified “spiritual” friend who is interested in learning more about other faiths. Father Andrew’s style is clear and readable. He is thorough in his survey of the religious landscape of this country, but not overly detailed. Enough history is covered for the reader to gain his bearings, and each tradition is allowed to speak for itself. The author keeps the reader in mind so that the distinctions particular to each confession remain accessible. The author’s analysis of Roman Catholicism shows his ability to distill the primary differences between the Orthodox Faith and heterodox ones. Father Andrew goes on to address in detail the key issues usually cited as the reasons for the Great Schism between Rome and the Eastern Churches—papal infallibility and supremacy, and the filioque—and other doctrinal, liturgical, and ecclesiological points of divergence. However, his skill and precision in articulating the starting points from which these better-known differences emerge make his treatment of the divisions between the Eastern and Roman traditions particularly helpful for the reader wishing to understand them more deeply. One of the primary concerns in this book is the consideration of the consequences that religious beliefs bring to bear upon the life of the adherent. Here we have a remedy to the unexamined rhetoric of the notion that “all religions are the same” and the ubiquitous and often unconscious assumption that what we believe, or the set of concepts we embrace as truth, does not make a difference in religious validity or practice. The inclusion of a chapter on non-mainstream Christians such as Mormons, Unitarian Universalists, and Christian Scientists is also helpful. Many people do not understand how fundamentally different these groups are and why exactly the Orthodox Church and many other traditional Christian groups do not, properly speaking, consider them Christian. Perhaps of even greater benefit for the reader is the chapter on non- Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Foreword 15 Christian religions, a category to which increasing numbers of Americans adhere. We are often ill-informed about non-Christian faiths. Take the difference between Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims. How many Christians are aware why such a division exists? Father Andrew gives a basic answer to this question and familiarizes us with many other aspects of Islam of which we are probably ignorant. Many Americans are religiously unaffiliated and describe themselves as agnostics or atheists, or they adhere to a kind of New Age syncretism that heavily incorporates elements from Eastern religions or seeks to find the common “core” of all religions. Addressing these non-Christian religions is helpful because many Americans are shifting away from Christianity. Moreover, as our world becomes more globalized and lesser-known religions are covered in the media or are encountered in visits to other parts of the world, this chapter equips the Christian with sufficient knowledge to begin to be informed and respectful, not fearful or ignorant. Like Christ, who knew secrets about the woman at the well that astounded her, and who knew the inner thoughts of the Pharisees who opposed Him, we ought to take seriously the task of knowing the stories of others, including those who do not share our faith. Then we will be able to fulfill the command given us by the Apostle Peter to “always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear” (1 Peter 3:15). Father Andrew’s advice in his chapter on Roman Catholicism rings resoundingly through the whole spectrum of our attitude toward, and conversations with, persons who believe differently than we do: “Most of all, it is critical that we understand the theology of the person in front of us as well as our own.” This book, I am certain, will do a great service in equipping its readers to engage with confidence, yet with openness and humility, in those conversations. It is with great joy that I recommend this volume, already a success in its first printing and now generously and conscientiously expanded by its author. It is with sincere gratitude to God for Father Andrew, and for his numerous accomplishments as pastor and scholar, speaker and writer, that I add my Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY enthusiastic endorsement to this latest contribution by my former student to the growing body of inspiring and illumining literature available both to those who have “seen the true Light” of the apostolic Orthodox faith, and to those seeking to know more about “the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). Finally, it is with fervent prayers that I entreat our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ, the Way, the Truth, and the Life toward whom all the highest promptings of the human heart direct us: May He pour out His choicest blessings on each and every reader who cherishes these chapters, granting all of you the good things that come from His hands. +MICHAEL The Most Reverend Michael G. Dahulich, Ph.D. Archbishop of New York and the Diocese of New York and New Jersey Orthodox Church in America

Preface to the Revised Edition

am the kind of writer who is never satisfied with what he writes. Almost from the first delivery of the Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy podcast in 2009 and the subsequent release of the book in 2011, I was aware that my text was not where I wanted it to be. That awareness has only been heightened in the years that followed, most especially because I learned that the text was being used in ways I didn’t foresee when I first wrote it. My original intention was for O&H to be a basic-level parish educational series for Orthodox Christians. As a result, if the details on other religions’ teachings weren’t always entirely precise or thorough (or, as I learned later, correct), I still felt that it was an acceptable text. But I learned that nonOrthodox people were listening to the podcast or reading the book and using that as an introduction to the Orthodox Church, and in some cases, joining the Church. I became aware that I needed to do some work to make the way I represent non-Orthodox teachings much more recognizable to their adherents—and that, of course, is only fair. As I received feedback for both the podcast and the book, I learned that the text was also not where some others wanted it to be. If you are one of the many people who wrote privately or publicly to offer up critiques for this work, I am grateful to you. Thank you! Some of the criticism I received was based on the fact that we simply disagreed. There wasn’t much I could do about that. But I also learned that I got a few things wrong, whether because I had been misled by something I read, because I hadn’t researched as thoroughly as I should have, or because I subsequently learned more about the topics in the text. Part of the learning

Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at 17 http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY process was via people questioning what I had written (whether critically or just inquisitively). Part of it came through discussions with friends. Part of it was reading further on all these fascinating subjects. And part came from the fact that the religious situation on the ground has changed in some ways since I first began writing this work in the fall of 2008. I also realized that some subjects to which I had previously devoted only a paragraph or so deserved a more thorough treatment. The most significant result of that realization in this new edition is the addition of a whole chapter on Pentecostalism, the Charismatic movement, and the Word of Faith movement. These movements represent some of the largest, fastest-growing, and most visible parts of Protestantism, and they are distinct enough that the Evangelicals and Revivalists with whom I grouped them in the previous edition see themselves as quite different from them. It is one thing for a Lutheran to see himself as different from a Presbyterian, but it is another, I believe, for a Baptist Evangelical to see himself as different from a Pentecostal. This grouping represents, I believe, a fourth form of Protestantism and so deserves its own chapter. For opening my eyes to the depth, complexity, and humanity of these movements, I am grateful to my two local friends “the Mikes,” Michael Landsman and Dr. Michael Petrow, who also offered useful corrections and insights for my comments on Evangelicalism. The new chapter on Pentecostalism really owes its existence to my friendship with these two fine men. Along the journey that has been the production of multiple versions of this material, I’ve had the opportunity to think a good bit about apologetics, polemics, and ecumenism (for various definitions of each). The issue of Orthodox relations with other Christians and our assessment of their theology and practice is bound to come up when one writes a book like this. To that end, let me emphasize that I am neither an expert nor a professional in those fields. My purpose has always been to introduce the reader to the main issues involved and the most important views about them. I do not regard myself as an apologist or a polemicist. Nor am I an ecumenist—by any definition of that word (good or bad). But I do have some thoughts on those matters, so I discuss them in an expanded epilogue. I have had it in the back of my mind for some time that I wanted to Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Preface to the Revised Edition 19 produce a revised, expanded edition of the book. In returning to my text, I found that I also wanted to clean up some expressions in the writing, to simplify, to expand, to update, and, overall, to make what I hope is a better— not just bigger—book in almost every way. That said, the book is much bigger, around 90 percent bigger, despite my having cut some material from the appendices (which is now readily available online). I especially wanted to adjust my tone in certain places, because, while I deliberately tried to be as restrained as possible in the original writing, I am aware that in some ways I wrote more polemically than was really warranted. I can imagine that some astute readers may compare the original with the revised edition. They may notice a word or quotation excised here or there, something nuanced, and so forth, and they may wonder what exactly I meant by making a certain change. Most of the changes—which are to be found in nearly every paragraph—are merely the changes of a writer who does not like the way something sounds and wants to make it work better. Some readers may conclude from a given change that I have softened my views on something, that I am trying to slip something in. Nothing could be further from the truth, I assure you. I still believe that the Orthodox Church is the one, true Church of Christ, that we cannot blur appropriate lines between it and other religious groups, and so on. But I also believe that if I got something wrong, I need to fix it, even if the way in which I got it wrong is a popular thing to do among some Orthodox. We should never be satisfied with repeating old polemics, especially when those polemics were never based on a true reading of what the other group is teaching, or when they have simply gone out of date because the other group is now teaching something different. There is a movement, especially visible on the Internet, that delights in this repetition and thus only serves to drive people away from Christ’s Church— people who do not recognize their own beliefs in what is being said about them. The formulaic repetition of those polemics only serves to communicate to those who read them that the polemicist cannot be bothered to learn the truth about what other people believe. I have been guilty of that behavior myself at times, but it’s wrong, and I’m sorry. Other Christians and members of other religions are not our enemies, and we do no one any service if we do Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY not seek to know them. I ask forgiveness for anything I have gotten wrong in the past and also for any new errors that may have made their way into this present text. In this process, I have benefited from the help of many people who are not only smarter than I am but far more learned. In particular, I am grateful for the help of the “Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy Cabal,” a virtual (and occasionally literal) gathering of folks interested in all these questions, many of whom have written articles for the Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy website. We have an ongoing discussion amongst ourselves about almost everything discussed in this book, as well as many related topics. The learning and wisdom of these people have expanded my own vision considerably, and several of them contributed directly to my understandings in writing this new edition. Among them I am grateful to Richard Barrett, Jamey Bennett, Fr. Lucas Christensen, Seraphim Danckaert, Prof. Cyril Jenkins, Fr. Stephen de Young, Dr. Eric Jobe, Fr. Joseph Lucas, Hieromonk Herman (Majkrzak), Gabe Martini, Samuel Noble, Dylan James O’Brien Pahman, and Fr. Esteban Julio Vázquez. First among the Cabal, in terms of his ability to compel me to rethink things, was the late and untimely lost Rev. Dr. Matthew Baker, whose staggering theological, philosophical, and historical knowledge was exceeded perhaps only by his authentic brotherly love. Fr. Matthew especially showed me, particularly concerning Roman Catholicism and some forms of Protestantism, that I needed to learn more directly from Catholics and Protestants themselves and not to listen mainly to what others say about them. Although this book remains dedicated to my wife Nicole, I am secondarily dedicating this revised edition in memory of my friend and seminary neighbor Matt, whom we still mourn and whose loss we cannot replace. May his memory be eternal! As I’ve tried to understand my subject better, and in keeping with the advice of Fr. Matthew, I’ve had many conversations over the years with people from outside the Orthodox tradition, trying as well as I can to understand what they believe and practice themselves, as well as with Orthodox people who have a history in other traditions. One who helped me a good deal when it came to Rome—including offering some good criticisms for things I had Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Preface to the Revised Edition 21 gotten wrong or overstated—is Dom Benedict Andersen, a Benedictine monk in Ireland. We obviously do not agree on everything (so don’t blame him for anything I get wrong), but I am grateful for his time. Some in the O&H Cabal also helped to correct me regarding Rome. For helping me to understand Lutheranism better, I am grateful to Fr. John Fenton, whose decades of experience and study in the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod allowed him to give me many useful corrections, both on Lutheran theology and history and on the early Reformation in general. Fr. Gregory Hogg, another former Lutheran pastor, helped me better to understand Lutheran hermeneutics. Fr. Stephen de Young and Prof. Jenkins especially helped me to understand the Reformed world far better, having long been part of it themselves. And as someone from within the Reformed tradition who is friendly to the Orthodox, Russell Vincent Warren also gave me many helpful comments. On Anglicanism, I’m grateful to Fr. Nicholas Alford and Fr. Alban Waggener, both formerly part of that movement and now Orthodox priests. Fr. Alban had been a bishop in the Anglican Continuum. In addition to the help I got from “the Mikes” on Pentecostalism and its children, I am also indebted to Fr. Barnabas Powell, a former Pentecostal pastor who described Pentecostals as having been his “tribe” for many years before he became an Orthodox Christian; as well as to Dr. David Ford, who also belonged to that movement before becoming Orthodox. On the non-mainstream Christian groups, I received valuable help from Dn. Thomas Crowe, especially regarding the Mormons. On non-Christians, Samuel Noble used his extensive knowledge of Semitic language, culture, and religion to assist me with Near Eastern religions (as well as some of the Far Eastern ones), while Derick Mattern’s extensive experience in travel was brought to bear for Far Eastern religions. And ancient Semitic language and culture specialist Dr. Jobe helped me not only with the section on Judaism but with nearly anything else referencing ancient Israel. My thanks again go to John Maddex of Ancient Faith Ministries, who was willing to take the risk on me initially and also agreed to this revised edition, including the new podcast based on it. I am grateful to all the staff of Ancient Faith Radio and Ancient Faith Publishing for the work they do. Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY The foreword written by my mentor and erstwhile confessor while in seminary, Archbishop Michael, is likewise a great gift. I thank God for the love and care shown to me by His Eminence during the challenging seminary years and for his continued friendship. I am grateful for the shepherding of my own hierarchs, Metropolitan Joseph and Bishop Thomas, who inspire their clergy always to do more and to be more. Likewise, I thank God for the late Metropolitan Philip, whose vision for bringing this Orthodox faith to ordinary Americans is bright in our memories. I continue to be thankful for the faithful people of St. Paul Antiochian Orthodox Church in Emmaus, Pennsylvania, who received these lectures in 2009–2010 and the new versions in 2015–2016. They are the primary audience for this work and the primary reason I am writing these texts. I said earlier that I was not an expert on these matters, but I do try to be a teacher. Teaching is one of the things I love most about the priesthood, and I am grateful that I can teach at St. Paul’s. Thanks especially belong to my wife Nicole and my children, who sacrifice for their husband and father to follow these many religious rabbit trails. I am grateful also to my parents. My father Bill especially gave me his own great love for history, which is one of the great vehicles for learning the truth, and my late mother Sandy (along with my father) taught me to pursue truth no matter where it led me. One final note for this preface: You may notice that the subtitle of the book has changed, from Exploring Belief Systems Through the Lens of the Ancient Christian Faith to the new Finding the Way to Christ in a Complicated Religious Landscape. That change is intended to signal my now-larger purpose for this work—instead of focusing solely on helping Orthodox Christians to understand and address other theologies, I am now explicitly intending this work also to be used by the non-Orthodox to help them learn about the Orthodox Church. I hope this work will contribute toward our getting to know one another better in forming relationships of genuine friendship. All errors here are my own. And, if I may borrow a phrase from my Protestant friends—Soli Deo gloria.

Preface to the First Edition

his book did not start out as a book. It began its existence as a series of seven lectures first given for an adult education class at St. George Orthodox Cathedral in Charleston, West Virginia, in answer to a question from a parishioner at the cathedral: “What’s the difference between Orthodoxy and other faiths?” Those who are “professionals” (and I use the term quite loosely) in theological life may often be surprised to discover that what is so clearly and radically distinct to them may look fuzzy and undifferentiated to those who have not yet taken the time to peer more closely into the details of theology. I believe this surprise results from a modern situation in which theology is viewed as something only of interest to the so-called “professionals,” not something that could present any interest to anyone else. What I have found, however, is that most people actually are interested in theology, once the details are brought out, and particularly when it becomes clear that theology really does touch our everyday lives, that its shape shapes us in everything we do. This discovery became clearest to me when I first delivered the lectures that form the basis of this book. Now that this work in its lecture form has been delivered in other venues, both at St. Paul Orthodox Church in Emmaus, Pennsylvania (my current parish), and via Ancient Faith Radio as the Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy podcast, and most especially now that it’s appearing in print, my intent for it remains the same: to answer for Orthodox Christians the question of what the differences between the Orthodox faith and other faiths really are. I want to stress that this book’s purpose is not to be used as a weapon against believers in other faiths, and shame on you who attempt it! This work Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at 23 http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY was written to educate Orthodox Christians, and while I imagine it may be read by people who are not Orthodox, they should realize that this book is not “aimed” at them, nor can its broad but nevertheless limited scope permit full justice to be done to other faiths’ doctrines and traditions. Although this book evaluates the content of other faiths’ teachings, it is not an exacting work of apologetics. True apologetics is carried on by people much more qualified and learned than I, and I have no doubt that such people may read this book and easily point out various areas where it is not up to proper apologetical standards, whether they agree with my conclusions or not. For those interested, there are plenty of places to find such debates. The foundational affirmation behind this work is that the Orthodox Christian faith is uniquely true, that it alone is the fullness of the revelation of God to man, and that the Orthodox Church is the same Church community founded by Jesus Christ through His apostles. Because this much is assumed to be true, this book’s treatment of other doctrines will never be satisfactory to those whose loyalties lie with those doctrines. (After all, if we agreed, either they would be Orthodox, or I would be whatever they are!) I have nevertheless tried to be as fair as I could. My hope for this book is to introduce to Orthodox Christians the major elements of doctrine and practice that make non-Orthodox faiths different from Orthodoxy. More detail and nuance than this introduction provides can be found in other works, and I encourage those who wish to pursue those questions to continue exploring them. For those who want a “handbook” to what separates other major faiths from Orthodox Christianity, this (I hope) is the book for you. Those familiar with the Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy podcast should note that this book is not merely a print edition of the same work. While much of the material is the same, this book represents a revision, expansion, and (in some cases) correction of the material from the podcast. Especially in that last regard, I am indebted particularly to two men who helped clarify a number of issues for me—Dr. Cyril Jenkins and Matthew Baker. Their ruthless reading of my manuscript was precisely what I needed. I am also grateful to all the people who showed up at the original lectures (in both Charleston and Emmaus) and challenged what I said, forcing me Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Preface to the First Edition 25 to think through some things more carefully and research them more thoroughly. Thanks also go to John Maddex of Conciliar Media, who (inexplicably) accepted the podcast for Ancient Faith Radio, and to the folks at Conciliar Press who have helped to refine this work in its written form. I am most especially grateful to my wife, the Khouriyeh Nicole, who somehow always sees her husbandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s silly adventures as opportunities.

Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

1 Introduction 2

Doctrine Matters

ost of the time, we are concerned with the truth. A cashier has to make sure he knows the exact change he’s giving. A nurse has to apply just the right amount of medication to a patient. A mathematician checks and rechecks his proofs. A jury listens closely to all the facts to sort out the truth in a trial. A history teacher has to get the names and dates right. A scientist publishes work for peer review to make sure everyone gets the same results. In all of these cases and more, what’s important is not opinion. What’s important is the truth. Yet it seems that when it comes to questions of religion and spirituality and the accompanying moral questions, we suddenly become relativists. The truth doesn’t matter. Instead of asking who God really is, we say, “Who is God to you?” Instead of asking what it means that God became a man, we say that’s okay for some people to believe if they want. Instead of asking whether God expects something from us or has any divine commands for us, we judge religious expectations by what we want, by whether a religion fits into our lifestyle. The pursuit of objectivity goes out the window, and subjectivity reigns. And usually it goes beyond subjectivity—which is trying to see a truth from different points of view—to the far more variable, trivial, and inconsequential world of opinion and preference. It’s not about truth any more. It’s about what I want. This fundamental problem is compounded by the prevailing lack of familiarity with the traditional tools of spiritual knowledge. Most people are

Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at 27 http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY not doing what it takes in order to see what is true. If an astronomer refused to use a telescope or a biologist refused to use a microscope, we would regard such people as having, at best, incomplete knowledge in their fields. From the Christian point of view, the tool that is lacking for spiritual knowledge is purity of heart, as Jesus said: “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God” (Matt. 5:8). Purity of heart begins with humility. What is also lacking is proper guidance on how to attain that purity from those who have seen God and passed on this experience to the next generation. Plato defined this same problem when he wrote The Republic and included the famous Allegory of the Cave. In this allegory, prisoners chained in a cave for their whole lives believe that the world is defined by the shadows they see on the wall. If one of the prisoners should escape and find his way to the surface, and then see the sun and the world for what it is, how would he be able to describe that experience to people whose whole life is defined by shadows? And when he stumbled on his way back into the cave, trying to become reconditioned to life in darkness, those still chained to the wall would ridicule him as having been damaged by his experience in the light rather than enlightened. Such is the plight of many Christian believers today—the world sees them not as enlightened but as damaged by religion. So I would like to suggest that the great spiritual battle of our time is not a struggle between believers and atheists. Rather, it is a struggle between pride and humility. We expect and even demand humility in most areas of life— what really matters is what is objectively true, not what any of us might think is true. Our opinions are not what is important. Yet when it comes to ultimate questions about ourselves and the nature of existence, about the meaning of life, we set aside humility and place ourselves at the center of the universe. Succumbing to the temptation to pride is common even among Christians. One of the basic assumptions of this book is that Truth—and here I deliberately use the capital T—is not relative and that Orthodox Christianity represents the fullness of the Truth, the locus of the revelation of God in Christ. Why? For the Orthodox Christian, Jesus Christ is the Truth (John 14:6), and because the Truth is a Person, truth cannot be relativized. From that basic position we will be describing and analyzing various religious groups and their teachings, seeing what we share and where we differ. Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Doctrine Matters 29 Because Truth is not relative, we should be willing to set aside whatever we would prefer to be true and embrace only what really is true, changing ourselves, our attitudes, and our beliefs whenever necessary. If we come upon some truth we disagree with, yet we can see that it must be true, we should say not “I don’t believe it” but rather “I don’t believe it yet.”

The Truth Business It has become unfashionable to speak as though one particular doctrine is true and another is false. Yet if we were to look at the situation only one hundred years ago, we would see that most religious groups regarded their own doctrines as true and also came to the logical conclusion that contradicting doctrines must therefore be false. (That’s still true for most religions in the world.) Most churches practiced closed communion. Most churches would unhesitatingly have called other churches’ adherents by the name heretic. Most churches would likely say that only their own members could be saved. This is not to say that those were the “good old days,” but they were at least days in which believers took doctrine far more seriously. Today, to come to the conclusion that some doctrines are true and others are false, and especially to speak publicly about it, is often regarded as not being “loving,” a word usually used to mean “nice.” A public disagreement over religion is usually considered offensive. And so, living as we do in an age of political correctness and relativism, we have been given new points of cultural theology that we are supposed to profess. This theology can be expressed with statements like these: “All religions are basically the same. What matters is that you live a good life.” “We all worship the same ‘God.’” “Religion is a private matter. Don’t try to ‘impose’ your beliefs on others.” “I don’t think any religion has it all right. We’ll find out what’s true when we get to heaven.” All of these statements are based on one common assumption: Teachings about God and the ultimate nature of reality are not very important. That’s why they should not be discussed publicly. That’s why their details don’t Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY really matter. That’s why we should not try to win people over to our faith. There really is no such thing as Truth. Everything is relative—except perhaps for the statement that “everything is relative.” For nearly everything else in life, whether it’s technology, health care, or even the Super Bowl record of your favorite football team, we demand seriousness, detail, and accuracy. Yet we as a culture are ignoring a basic yet obvious truth: If there really is a God, then who He is and what He might want from us are more important than anything else in the universe. It is on this basic assumption that this book rests. As believers, we are not in the “niceness” business. We are in the Truth business. The purpose of this book is to examine the differences between the faith of the Orthodox Christian Church and the faiths of other Christian communions and of non-Christians. As an Orthodox Christian, I believe the Orthodox Christian faith is uniquely true. I would not be Orthodox if I did not believe it to be the true faith revealed by God in His Son Jesus Christ. If I encounter a teaching of my Church that makes no sense to me or that strikes me as incorrect, then it is I who need to be reformed, not the Church. This is the traditional view of almost all religions, as opposed to the modern consumer-style understanding of faith now popular: that each person is the arbiter of what is true and false, and that he is free to pick whatever bits of “spirituality” and belief he likes from a sort of religious buffet. Just imagine, though, if we took that approach in other areas of life. What if we allowed doctors to pick whatever they wanted out of a smorgasbord of medical ideas and treatments? What if we ate whatever we wanted without regard to whether the food we choose is nutritious or even poisonous? What if we formed a government based not on equality and justice but rather on personal feelings and opinions? If a relentless pursuit of truth is necessary in all of these fields, how much more is it appropriate when it comes to questions of eternal significance? The nature of Truth is that it is true no matter what anyone says about it. In the face of Truth, there is no opinion. Most people already believe that deep down, but they may not apply it to the question that matters most, namely, “Who is God and what does He want from me?” But we all know that there is good, and there is evil. There is truth, and there is falsehood. Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Doctrine Matters 31 This knowledge, based on our own experience in everyday life, should inform all of our thoughts and actions regarding what is ultimately true.

The Goal of Religion The purpose of this book is not to “prove” that Orthodox Christianity is the one, true faith. I do not believe that it is possible to prove that, at least not by what can be written in a book. What we are seeking to do, however, proceeding from the position of the Orthodox Christian faith, is to show that the differences between Orthodoxy and other faiths are real and that they are important. If you’ve ever visited the social media juggernaut Facebook, then you probably know that users of the site put together profiles of themselves, detailing various bits of information about who they are and what they do. One of the details you can choose is labeled as “Religious Views.” I use Facebook, and this feature has gotten me thinking several times. This is what most people think of when they think about religion, that it’s a question of “views.” Religion is an opinion you have, something you think. Notice that Facebook doesn’t even use the term beliefs. But for most traditional religions, religion is not merely a set of “views.” Rather, religious faith is a whole way of life, a purposeful way of living with a set of goals at its heart that informs everything in that way of life. In its terminology, Facebook is representing a secularist philosophy, which is not so much an outright denial of spiritual reality as a compartmentalization of elements of life into neat categories that have nothing inherently to do with each other. In this box, I keep my views on economics. In this one are my views on cable television. In this one, I have my reading preferences, and in this one, I keep my religion. But even the word religion itself (which some people don’t like to use in reference to Christianity) means something quite different. Religion means “reconnection,” to build and rebuild links. What you’re trying to link yourself to will vary from one religion to another. But the key is that there is something happening here. It’s not just something you think or agree with, and it’s not just about you. There is an “other” assumed by this process of reconnection. Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY There’s something out there, whether you call it God, gods, Brahman, the Force, a “higher power,” or whatever. Religion is not merely something you think; it is something you do, something that engages you. Here is a fundamental truth about all religious practice: What you believe and what you do make a difference. If that is true, and I think it’s obvious that it should be, then there is a corollary we have to accept: If you change what you believe and what you do, you will get different results. This is true of everything in life. My big brother is a chemical engineer. My little sister is a biochemist. They know these things to be true. But you don’t have to ask them. Ask a doctor. Ask a physicist, a psychologist, a bricklayer, a janitor. In their fields, they all will tell you that what you believe and what you do make a difference, and if you change those things, you’ll get different results. What bugs me is that we often don’t apply this basic principle to what matters most in human life. In a religious context, this fundamental truth means that different religions, because they believe differently and practice differently, will yield different results. Sometimes, those various results are all put under one label, like salvation. But what does it mean to be “saved”? To a Hindu practicing traditional yoga, salvation means release from the physical body and absorption into the oblivion of the universe, the annihilation of individual personhood in Nirvana. That is not what salvation means to a Baptist. But what a Baptist means by that term and what an Orthodox Christian means by it aren’t the same thing, either. Members of each of those faiths have different methods of trying to get where they want to go. And where they want to go may well differ. Further, though, because there is truth and there is falsehood, and because most religions have traditionally claimed that their faith is true and that others are, by implication, at least somewhat false, then that means that some religious believers are fundamentally mistaken about their beliefs and practices. They’re not going to get the results they think they will. We can’t all be right, because we’re making different claims about the nature of reality. In a room full of chemists all experimenting variously with the same chemicals, some will get useful products and others will get explosions in their faces.

Doctrine Matters 33

The Nature of Truth In the Orthodox Christian faith, our purpose in life is to become more like Jesus Christ. The question of whether we “go to heaven” when we die is only one element in a larger picture. That picture, ultimately, is of communion with the Holy Trinity. An Orthodox Christian’s whole life has one goal: union with the Holy Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the one God who created all things. The path to that union is Jesus Christ, the God-man, the second Person of the Holy Trinity. Salvation is the attainment of eternal life. In John 17, in Jesus’ prayer to the Father before He went to His Crucifixion, He defines what this means: “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (17:3). He later prays, “And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me” (17:22–23). Therefore, in the Orthodox Christian faith, being saved—having eternal life—means knowing God in Jesus Christ. It also means receiving from Jesus the glory which, as the Son of God, He has from His Father. And finally, it means doing so in oneness with other believers. Christianity is a religion expressed “in plural.” For the Orthodox, salvation is far more than whether we get out of hell when we die. It is a deep, intimate knowledge of God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And in this deep knowledge—which is more than the intellectual accumulation of facts—those who are being saved receive the very glory of God. Aiming toward heaven or hell at the moment of death means that our experience of God in this life continues on after the resurrection to the next life, but amplified. If we love God and know Him deeply, then our experience in the resurrection will be endless and intense joy. If we reject God or simply ignore Him in this life, then our experience of His love in the next life will be alien to us and felt as suffering and punishment (John 5:29). This is why doctrine matters. This is why heresy is dangerous. Christian doctrine is oriented toward an intimate knowledge of God, because it is the character of our knowledge of Him that determines our eternal path, our perpetual experience in the life to come. This knowledge will greatly depend

Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY on our adherence to correct doctrine and the living out of that doctrine in our daily lives. Let me give an example I often use when talking about why what you believe matters. Imagine that you are a member of my parish, and you heard a rumor that I was a practicing homosexual. Now, this is not true, but if you believed it, it would affect your relationship with me, and because I am a clergyman in your church, it would probably affect the whole parish community. Those who regard homosexual activity as a sin might distance themselves from me, and our relationship would break down. Those who see things differently might try to get closer to me, but that closeness would be based on a falsehood. Some might drift away from the parish entirely. Others currently outside might hear the rumor and never come for a visit, or instead might consider joining. Those closest to me, my wife and my family, would have their lives disrupted if they believed the rumor. It would probably destroy our family life. And then the destruction of that family life would have reverberations not only in our extended family, but among our friends, the parish community, and so on. All because of a false belief about who I am. Imagine the false belief were still serious but a little less extreme. Let’s say the rumor was that I had a drinking problem. The effects of that rumor would probably still be significant, though nowhere near as explosive as the other. In any case, all those relationships are affected not only by the moral actions of those involved—whether they have done good or evil to each other—but by what they believe about each other and how they act on those beliefs. Now, magnify all of those effects in proportion to the importance of the worship and knowledge of the God of the universe. Some false doctrines about Him can have major spiritual and even political ramifications. (If, for instance, you believed that the ancient Jewish temple in the modern state of Israel had to be rebuilt before Jesus returned to earth, wouldn’t that affect not just your theology but also your politics?) Others are of lesser effect. But all of them, to one degree or another, divert us from a true, pure knowledge of the only true God, and that will affect whether and how we receive His glory and how we experience Him in the next life. Living a moral life according to the law of God is critical for the life in Christ, Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Doctrine Matters 35 but it is not enough. We must also know God as He has actually revealed Himself. That is why doctrine matters.

Some Technical Terms We have to be clear on what various words mean that are used throughout this book. Within the Orthodox tradition, these words have specific, technical meanings (even if they are sometimes used in non-technical ways), and we have to be careful how we use them. So here is a short list of terms you need to know when studying and discussing the question of Orthodoxy and heterodoxy. Orthodoxy—Both “true teaching” (literally “straight doctrine”) and “true worship” (literally “straight glory”). Orthodox Christianity is the life in faith given by Jesus Christ to the apostles and then passed down within the Church from generation to generation. It is not possible to be Orthodox outside the historical community of the Orthodox Church. Heterodoxy—“Other teaching” and “other worship.” Heterodoxy is anything that contradicts Orthodox Christian doctrine and worship. This term may also be used to refer to all non-Orthodox Christian groups. Dogma—The unchangeable, non-negotiable teachings of the Church. Dogma comes from the Greek word for “seem,” used originally in the apostolic phrase “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us” (Acts 15:28). Dogma is usually expressed by the doctrinal decrees of the ecumenical councils. Doctrine—How dogma is taught. This can change somewhat over time as the Church encounters new cultural and linguistic situations in which dogma needs to be explained. Doctrine and dogma are sometimes used interchangeably. Theology—Reflections on the dogma and doctrine of the Church. Theology is much more variable over time but should not contradict dogma. Theology is sometimes also used interchangeably with dogma and doctrine. Tradition—The faith “handed over” (the literal meaning of tradition) by the apostles to their disciples and then to each succeeding generation. Often described as “the life of the Holy Spirit in the Church.” Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY Heresy—Literally, “choosing.” Heresy is the act of choosing to be separate from Orthodoxy in doctrine and/or worship. The word may also be used to describe any heterodox teaching. Heretic—One who was a follower of the Orthodox Christian faith and then consciously rejected it, especially having been given the choice by the proper authorities. Technically speaking, one who was never Orthodox cannot be a heretic. He may, however, believe in heretical teachings (i.e., heterodoxy). This word has also been used more broadly to refer to anyone who believes heresy. Apostasy—Literally, “standing apart.” Apostasy is the act of deliberately leaving the Church. One who does so is an apostate. This word is sometimes reserved for those who leave to a non-Christian religion or to no religion at all. Schism—Literally, “separation.” Schism is a separation of a group from the Church, which may not (but often does) include heresy on the part of the schismatics. Schism usually involves setting up a parallel hierarchy.

A Brief Overview of Christian History Generally speaking, most Christians were all members of a single Church for roughly a thousand years from the time of Christ’s Resurrection from the dead until about the middle of the eleventh century. There were schisms here and there even from the time of the apostles, but with a few notable exceptions, there were no truly major competing Christian churches. Most Christians belonged to a single Church that traced its roots directly to, and whose leaders stood in a direct historical succession from, the apostles. They were focused in five great spiritual centers: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem. These five great churches together were one Christian Church, and they shared the same dogma, the same beliefs, and the same spiritual life, without any changes in substance since the time of the apostles. These churches were led by bishops. Their worship life was liturgical, involving detailed, meaningful, and highly symbolic rituals whose sacraments were understood as truly conveying God’s grace to the believer. Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Doctrine Matters 37 It was during this period, specifically in the late fourth century, that the canon of the New Testament came to be finalized, first written down by the bishop of Alexandria in the year 367, St. Athanasius the Great. That list from 367 is the earliest list of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament as we now know it. The Christian Church functioned for more than three hundred years without the ability to ask itself, “What does the Bible say?” In the eleventh century, issues that had been simmering for some time on the back burner between the churches of Rome and Constantinople came to a boil. Rome broke communion with Constantinople (meaning they could not receive the Eucharist together nor worship together), and then Constantinople returned the favor and broke communion with Rome. The primary matter at issue was whether Rome’s bishop, the Pope, should be considered the ruler of all bishops, rather than simply the most senior. Rome said yes, but Constantinople said no. Eventually, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem all clearly said no, too, so communion was also broken between them and Rome. From that time on, we can clearly see the independent formation of the Roman Catholic Church, with the Pope as its absolute head. The other churches that remained together and continued in the old way of seeing all bishops as essentially equal are now known as the Orthodox Church, sometimes also called the “Eastern Orthodox” or “Greek Orthodox” Church (“Greek Church” by itself was common in English writing prior to the twentieth century). Later, in the sixteenth century, an Augustinian monk in Germany by the name of Martin Luther famously protested against various abuses of the Roman Catholic Church, most especially the sale of indulgences to get believers out of purgatory, but also against the absolute authority of the Pope and some other matters. His publication in 1517 of ninety-five theses against the claims of the Pope was the moment that began the Protestant Reformation, a major break-up of Christianity in Western Europe. Within a generation, there came to be multiple Protestant factions, all at odds with each other, but all at least united in their conviction that Rome was wrong. Protestantism has continued to fracture in the five centuries since, and unlike the original Protestants, most now do not have bishops and do not worship liturgically with sacraments. Some estimates of the number of Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY rotestant Christian denominations are as high as thirty thousand, though P that number includes many single, independent congregations. Among them, you can find a bewildering array of different beliefs. And most of them claim to be “ just going by the Bible.” Thus, over the past thousand years, there were two great fractures in Christian history, and Christians are now divided roughly into three general groupings: Orthodox Christianity, Roman Catholicism, and the many denominations of Protestantism.

1 One 2

Orthodoxy, Heterodoxy, Heresy, and History How the Orthodox Church Views the Non-Orthodox

t is fundamental to the character of Orthodox theology that we do not theologize outside the Church. That is, although we have very detailed theology of what it means to be an Orthodox Christian, we have no theology about what it means not to be one except in the sense that we have a general description of what it means to be damned. But damnation is not equal to being non-Orthodox. God has never told us the spiritual status of the non-Orthodox, except in only the most general terms that cannot be reliably applied to particular people. You can’t find it in the Scripture, in the writings of the Fathers, or in the divine services. All we have been given is the Way. (The Way is one of the most ancient terms for Christianity.) We can therefore look at a given doctrine or practice and say, “That is not the Way.” But we cannot say, “All of you who have embraced that heresy are forever damned.” We don’t know that. We can say, “That doctrine leads to damnation,” but not, “Anyone who teaches that doctrine is certainly damned,” and especially not, “Because you teach that doctrine, you are damned.” Even the solemn conciliar anathemas (curses) pronounced against historical heretics do not go so far as to declare them damned.

Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at 39 http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY Orthodox Christians believe that the Way is Jesus Christ (John 14:6), the God-man, and that He founded a concrete, historical community, the Church, in which His followers live out the life He gave them through the work of the apostles. Furthermore, we believe that the Orthodox Church is uniquely that one Church, that Christ did not found denominations or a movement called “Christianity,” and that the division of Christians is a sin against love and against God. Historically, nearly all Christian groups have believed something similar about themselves and have also believed that other Christians were wrong in at least some aspects of their doctrine and practice, so the Orthodox are not unique in believing that their Church is the one Church. Religions are not all the same. They do not all worship the same “God.” This observation ought to be obvious to anyone who takes religious believers at their word when they describe their beliefs. Yet at the same time, we can recognize that there is truth in all religions and philosophies. St. Justin Martyr, in the second century, called this the spermatikos logos, the “Logos in seed form.” The Logos, or “Word,” is Jesus Christ (John 1:1–16), and St. Justin believed that all belief systems had within them the seeds of His revelation. Because all human beings are created according to the image of God, Jesus Christ, they are not capable of being wrong all the time. When I discuss the differences between Orthodoxy and other religions I often prefer to refer to those other faiths as “incomplete” rather than “false.” Yes, they usually have false elements, but it is better to focus primarily on what is true and show how that leads to Orthodoxy, the fullness of God’s revelation to mankind. This recognition of the truth in other religions is what has led to the traditional Orthodox approach to the reception of converts. Some are baptized and chrismated (confirmed), some are only chrismated, while some are received only by profession of faith and confession, all based on the similarity to Orthodoxy of the baptism and faith of the group in question. This variety in practice is attested to as early as the fourth century by St. Basil the Great, who goes on at some length in a letter to one Amphilochius about how different kinds of heterodox believers are to be received into the Church. This partial recognition of the Christianity of some non-Orthodox believers has been written into the canons of the Church and has become more or less standard Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Orthodoxy, Heterodoxy, Heresy, and History 41 in church history, but it comes into play mainly when people seek to join the Church. A saying from the twentieth-century Orthodox theologian Paul Evdokimov has become familiar to many Orthodox: “We know where the Church is; it is not for us to judge and say where the Church is not.” This phrase is a helpful way of thinking about this question. From this saying, we can see that there are really two different questions when the Orthodox consider the non-Orthodox: the status of individual persons who hold to heterodox teachings, and the status of organizations that hold to heterodox teachings. From the Orthodox point of view, all Christian and non-Christian bodies that are not Orthodox are not the Church. The Church is a concrete, historical community founded by Jesus Christ through His apostles, which has existed in a real community for roughly two millennia. That is why we can say where the Church is. In Emmaus, Pennsylvania, where I live, the Church gathers in one place with a particular address. And of course the Church in Emmaus consists of all those people who belong to that community. Where the Church is in this earthly life can be answered empirically. The saying from Evdokimov also expresses the difficulty in applying ecclesiastical boundaries exactly, especially when there are breaks in communion. If there is a temporary break in communion (as sometimes happens between Orthodox churches), is one side the Church and the other side not? What if both sides remain in communion with others? Are breaks in communion possible within the Church or only from the Church? At what point does a schism mean that one side is truly outside the Church? We don’t have clear answers to those questions. We do tend to have consensus regarding certain groups, such as the Protestant churches, but the consensus is not as clear with others, such as the Roman Catholic Church. Concerning Rome in particular, you can find Orthodox who will say that Rome is definitely outside the Church. Others, however, will recognize that a schism exists but that it’s not clear whether that means exclusion from the Church. The question becomes more subtle when we’re discussing individual persons. For any person, whether formally a member of the Orthodox Church in this life or not, the critical question is whether that person will be a member in the next life after the resurrection. I am sure there are people who are Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY f ormally Orthodox today who will not be so when they enter into eternity. I am also sure there are people who are today outside those formal boundaries who will be inside them after the resurrection. While it has not been dogmatized within the Orthodox Church, one view of Christians who are not Orthodox was adopted by the eminent twentieth century theologian Fr. Georges Florovsky. He said that all who hold faith in Jesus Christ as God and Savior have a true ontological bond (that is, a bond in our very being). But he also held that schism has an ontological quality, and that the sense that Christians are “separated brethren” must place equal emphasis on both our sense of separation and of being brethren. Though it does not solve the ambiguities, this view makes the most sense to me. When it comes to individual persons, the only ones we know are Orthodox when it becomes permanent—in eternity—are the saints. The saints are the people we know “made it.” We live in hope, not in absolute rational certainty. (And it’s worth pointing out here that even churches that teach some kind of absolute certainty do not give perfect means for becoming certain. How does a Calvinist, for instance, certainly know that he is one of the elect? There are “marks of election,” but even those are a bit fuzzy. And how does he know those marks are the right ones?) Describing Christian life as hope does not lead to a life of anxiety, wondering whether we can ever really “know” whether we’re “in” or “out.” It is like being married—the relationship is always changing and evolving, but built on a foundation. There are good days and bad days. There is always the possibility for greater depth and unity, but also for dissolution and separation. It is a dynamic relationship, not a static status. Just as we hope for ourselves, we also hope for the non-Orthodox that they would embrace life in the Orthodox Church in this life; but if they do not, we hope that when presented with the fullness of the revelation of Jesus Christ in the move into the next life, they will embrace Him in that transition. We affirm that there is no salvation outside the Church, but ultimately whether one is in the Church is a question deferred to the end of time. I have known more than one convert to the Orthodox faith who said of his heterodox Christian parents after they died, “I believe they’re Orthodox now.” So, while we say with surety that heretical teachings are dangerous to the Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Orthodoxy, Heterodoxy, Heresy, and History 43 spiritual life, it is not up to us to judge any particular person in terms of how that danger affects him in particular. We do not know, because none of us can look into another’s heart. Nevertheless, because an Orthodox Christian believes that Orthodoxy represents the fullness of the Christian faith, he is called by God to share his faith with others, to invite them to experience that same fullness and be transformed by it. It is essential that all these discussions, while standing firm on what is true and right, be conducted with humility. The Orthodox evangelist must not say, “I am right, and you are wrong,” because, after all, he refers to himself as the “chief of sinners” (see 1 Tim. 1:15) every time he takes Communion. That the Orthodox Christian faith is uniquely true is not to the credit of any Orthodox person. The Orthodox did not invent it, and we all fall short of living it as we should, because we are sinners. Thus, the Orthodox Church proclaims her heritage as the one, original Christian Church founded by Christ not in pride, but in humility as a historical experience. I sometimes like to say, “The Orthodox faith is true, but not because of me.”

Essentials of Orthodox Christian Doctrine In order to be able to see heterodox doctrine clearly, we have to be clear on the essentials of Orthodox doctrine. What follows is a sort of expansion on the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, a summary of what Orthodox Christians believe.

The Holy Trinity There is one God, who created all things out of nothing. God is uncreated, existing before all created things, even time itself. God is three divine Persons (hypostases) who are one in essence, or consubstantial (homoousios). The three Persons of the Trinity are all absolutely equal in deity, power, honor, and eternality. Each Person of the Trinity shares all that it means to be God with the other two, but none of what it means to be that Person with the other two. There is nothing that two share without the third also sharing it. Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY The eternal source of the Godhead is the Father, from whom the Son is begotten and the Holy Spirit proceeds. God is essence and energies. God is absolutely transcendent and unknowable in His essence, but immanent and knowable in His energies. Grace is another term for God’s energies.

Jesus Christ Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the Second Person of the Trinity. Jesus Christ is fully divine by virtue of being the Son of God, begotten before all ages. He is of one essence, or consubstantial (homoousios), with the Father. Jesus Christ is fully human by virtue of being the son of the Virgin Mary, begotten in time of her and incarnate of her and the Holy Spirit. He is of one essence, or consubstantial (homoousios), with all of mankind. Jesus Christ is one Person (hypostasis) in two natures, the divine and the human. This union is the only hypostatic union in existence. Jesus is the Messiah prophesied in the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament). Jesus Christ was born, grew up, taught and healed, was crucified and died on the Cross, and then rose from the dead on the third day.

Salvation and the Church There is only one Church, the Orthodox Church. The Church is the Body of Christ, a divine-human organism, of which Christ is the chief member and the sole Head. Salvation is within and through the Church. Salvation is theosis, becoming divinized/deified, which means union (but not fusion) with God and becoming ever more like Him, becoming by grace what Christ is by nature as adopted children of God. It is participation in the energies of God, becoming “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet. 1:4), but not participation in His essence. This process extends through all eternity, because God is infinite. Other models for understanding salvation are also in Scripture and the rest of the Orthodox tradition. Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Orthodoxy, Heterodoxy, Heresy, and History 45 Salvation rescues us not only from the guilt of sin, but from the very power of sin and death. It is not merely a change in legal status, but a change in actual being. Salvation is possible only by the power of God, with the cooperation of man—“by grace . . . through faith” (Eph. 2:8). This cooperation is called synergy. God honors the free will He granted to man, so if man ceases his cooperation, then God’s grace is rendered inoperative. Cooperation consists in repentance of sins, prayer, and participation in the sacraments. The Holy Mysteries (sacraments) truly communicate grace by the action of God Himself through the clergy, who are the servants of the mysteries, not their masters. The clergy are, through the episcopacy, in the succession of the apostles, who were ordained by Christ. Christ will return again to earth, which will be the end of time and of reality as we now know it. All those who remain alive in the earthly life will then be transitioned into the next life, where everyone else awaits them. All the dead will then rise again, reuniting their bodies with their souls eternally. Everyone will be judged according to what they did in this life.

Major Historical Heresies Examining non-Orthodox religions is made easier not only by a knowledge of Orthodox doctrine but also by a knowledge of historical heresies that have been rejected by the Church as contradicting the revelation of God. Some still persist to this day, and some have revived anew, though sometimes in a different form. Following is a list of major heresies, grouped roughly in chronological order according to when they first arose. Note that the traditional names given to heresies may not be the same as what their adherents called them. Docetism (first century)—The teaching that Jesus was indeed divine, but that He only “appeared” to be man. This heresy is mentioned in the New Testament (though not by name) and also in the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch. One of the ramifications of this heresy is a denial of the involvement of physical matter in our salvation (called dualism, the opposition of Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY the spiritual to the physical). The docetists would therefore abstain from the Eucharist, because they said it is not truly Christ’s flesh and blood. Judaizing (first century)—The teaching that Gentiles first had to become Jews before becoming Christians and/or that Christians ought to adopt more Jewish teachings and practices than the Church already had included. Judaizing is dealt with in the New Testament, being the occasion for the Apostolic Council in Acts 15. The Apostle Peter was initially a Judaizer (or at least sympathetic to that party) but was opposed by Paul (Gal. 2:11–21), whose teachings prevailed at the council. Judaizing continued in various forms for some centuries, particularly among certain groups known as “Jewish Christians.” It is also addressed by St. Ignatius of Antioch and continues to be dealt with in subsequent centuries. Gnosticism (first century)—A broad term for a large group of different teachings. Almost all were dualistic (like docetism) and included fanciful and complicated cosmological schema regarding the arrangement of the universe and everything in it. Most gnostic groups taught that a saving knowledge (gnosis) was what was necessary for salvation. They often also taught that only a select few were able to reach the highest spiritual plane and that most people could only function on a lower level. Those who ascended to this higher level had esoteric, “secret” teaching passed on from Jesus. Books like The Gospel of Thomas (a noncanonical work claiming to be from the apostle) are generally regarded as classic gnostic writings. The second century writings of St. Irenaeus of Lyons contain a detailed catalog and refutation of various gnostic teachings. Marcionism (second century)—Marcion was a shipbuilder and semi-gnostic heretic who taught that the creator God of the Old Testament was not the Father of Jesus Christ; rather, they were two separate “gods.” To him, the Old Testament “god” was evil and capricious, while the New Testament God was loving and merciful. He was the first to put forward the idea of a Christian canon for the New Testament, rejecting the Old Testament. He included only books he regarded as fitting in with his ideas about God, including an edited version of Luke’s Gospel (attributed to St. Paul and called The Gospel of Christ), as well as versions of some of St. Paul’s letters and two texts attributed by his followers to Paul but not Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Orthodoxy, Heterodoxy, Heresy, and History 47 included in the Orthodox canon. He was excommunicated in 144 and established a parallel church hierarchy that persisted for some time. Montanism (second century)—Followers of the “prophet” Montanus, who claimed to be the Paraclete (a traditional name in Christianity for the Holy Spirit, usually translated as “comforter” or “advocate,” from John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7). Claiming to receive revelations directly from God that fulfilled and superseded the revelation given to the apostles, Montanus emphasized direct, ecstatic, and highly emotional spiritual experiences for all believers. Montanus was accompanied by two “prophetesses” named Prisca (or Priscilla) and Maximilla, who also claimed to receive visions from God, including the revelation of Christ in a female form. The Montanists did not claim to be messengers passing on the word from God but rather claimed that God “possessed” them and spoke directly through them. The early Christian writer Tertullian fell into this heresy, being drawn by the severe moralism and rigidity of Montanist teaching. Montanism continued into the eighth century. Chiliasm (second century)—The teaching that Christ will reign for a literal one thousand years on earth after His Second Coming. Chiliasm existed in various forms before the fourth century (when a consensus emerged on definitions for a number of major theological issues) and was even taught in ignorance by some Orthodox writers. In our own day, the phrase “whose kingdom shall have no end” in the Creed is used to refute this heresy, though I could not find a primary source to confirm the idea that this was its original intention. Chiliasm was generally out of favor by the fourth century, when the Creed was composed, so it seems more likely that the phrase was meant to bolster Christ’s kingship and divinity. Apokatastasis (second century)—Also called universalism, the teaching that all will eventually be saved, even if they reject God in the earthly life. Condemned in 543 at a council in Constantinople. There are various forms of apokatastasis (at least one of which may have been taught by St. Gregory of Nyssa), and the issue is complicated. The term itself refers to a “restoration” of all things. Origenism (second century)—A complex set of teachings from the theologian Origen (second century). Origen’s main problems were cosmological Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY and largely based on Greek pagan philosophical speculation (especially the works of Plato). Origen himself was never condemned in his lifetime, but his teachings later came to be such a problem that he was condemned by name in anathemas included in collections of the acts of the Fifth Ecumenical Council in Constantinople (553). Manichaeism (third century)—Not strictly a heresy from Christianity, but rather a Persian gnostic religion begun by a “prophet” named Mani, which influenced a number of Christian groups and was the basis for several spin-off heresies. Manichaeism was dualistic, as most gnostic faiths were, positing the existence of an evil creator god and a good, merciful god. The physical world is inherently evil and full of darkness, while the spiritual world is good and full of light. St. Augustine was a member of the Manichaean religion before he converted to the Church. Manichaeism persisted in various forms until the ninth century. Sabellianism (third century)—Also known as modalism or monarchianism, this is the teaching that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are merely “modes” of the one God. Sabellius (the founder of the movement) taught that Trinitarianism was wrong in saying there were three Persons who were all God. Rather, he saw them as “masks” worn by one divine Person. Besides Sabellius, another major proponent of modalism was Paul of Samosata. Sabellianism is also called patripassianism (“Father- suffering”), because it required that the Father suffered on the Cross (since the Father and Son are one Person). Novatianism (third century)—A rigorist teaching that believers who fell away during persecution or otherwise into serious sin could never be absolved. Novatian himself was an “antipope” (a non-canonical claimant to the episcopacy of Rome) whose teaching was condemned in 251. Donatism (fourth century)—The teaching that the moral unworthiness of a clergyman—especially if he had betrayed the faith, even if he later repented—nullifies the validity of the mysteries (sacraments) performed by him. Condemned by the Council of Arles in 314 and famously opposed by St. Augustine. Arianism (fourth century)—The major heresy of the fourth century and the occasion for the First Ecumenical Council in Nicea (325), Arianism Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Orthodoxy, Heterodoxy, Heresy, and History 49 taught that Christ was a created being rather than God. Arius denied that the Son was of one essence (homoousios) with the Father. Founded by Arius (a priest of the Church of Alexandria), this heresy persisted for some time, even after it was condemned by the council in Nicea. Semi-Arianism (fourth century)—Also denied that the Son was of one essence (homoousios) with the Father, but admitted that He was of a similar essence (homoiousios, a difference of one iota). Semi-Arianism persisted for some time after the Nicene Council but was effectively condemned by the confirmation of homoousios at the Second Ecumenical Council in 381. Apollinarianism (fourth century)—The teaching by Apollinarius that Jesus did not have a human mind, though He had a human body and lower soul (the place of emotions). Rather, the divine Logos (Word) took the place of His mind. Condemned at the Second Ecumenical Council (381). Pneumatomachianism (fourth century)—The teaching that the Holy Spirit is not divine, also called Macedonianism for its founder, Macedonius. The pneumatomachians were so named because they “fought against the Spirit,” saying that the Holy Spirit is not divine but a creature. Condemned at the Second Ecumenical Council with the expansion of the article on the Holy Spirit in the Creed. Pelagianism (fourth century)—Attributed to the British monk Pelagius (though his actual views are disputed), Pelagianism taught that man was capable of salvation without the assistance of divine grace and was a reaction to moral laxity that supposedly resulted from an overemphasis on grace. The major opponent of Pelagianism was St. Augustine of Hippo. Condemned at the Council of Carthage (418) and the Third Ecumenical Council in Ephesus (431). Nestorianism (fifth century)—Taught by Nestorius, patriarch of Constantinople. Nestorianism teaches that instead of one Person with two natures, Jesus Christ was rather two persons “conjoined” together by good will, one divine and one human. Nestorius thus refused to call the Virgin Mary Theotokos (“birth-giver to God”), but would only call her Christotokos, saying that she gave birth to Christ, but not to God. Condemned at the Third Ecumenical Council. The major opponent of Nestorianism was St. Cyril of Alexandria. Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/

ORTHODOXY & HETERODOXY Monophysitism (fifth century)—Also called Eutychianism for its founder, Eutyches, monophysitism taught that Jesus Christ was not “in two natures” but rather only “from two natures” (a phrase from St. Cyril), forming a single nature, either divine only or a hybrid of divine and human. (This teaching is distinct from the miaphysitism taught today by the Oriental Orthodox churches [e.g., Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian, etc.]. Although there is some disagreement between Orthodox writers as to whether miaphysitism is consistent and compatible with Orthodox Christology, the Oriental churches do condemn Eutyches.) Monophysitism was condemned at the Fourth Ecumenical Council in Chalcedon (451). Monothelitism (seventh century)—The teaching that Christ has only one will, the divine will (rather than a human will as well). Taught by Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople and Pope Honorius of Rome, who were both explicitly condemned as heretics along with their teaching by the Sixth Ecumenical Council in Constantinople (680–681). The major opponent of Monothelitism was St. Maximus the Confessor. Monoenergism (seventh century)—Closely related to both monophysitism and monothelitism, this heresy taught that Christ has only one energy, the divine energy, in opposition to Orthodox doctrine that Christ has both divine and human energies. Monoenergism was taught by most of the proponents of monothelitism and also opposed by St. Maximus. Iconoclasm (seventh century)—The teaching that icons are not permitted in churches and should not be venerated. This teaching was condemned at the Seventh Ecumenical Council in Nicea (787) and primarily opposed by St. John of Damascus. It was not until 843 that icons were publicly returned to churches on the first Sunday in Lent (the “Triumph of Orthodoxy”). Filioquism (sixth century)—The teaching that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally not only from the Father (as stated in the Creed and John 15:26), but from the Father “and the Son” (in Latin, filioque). The filioque was first inserted into the Creed at a council in Toledo, Spain, in 589, probably intended to emphasize the divinity of Jesus. It was again inserted into the Creed by the western emperor Charlemagne in 794 Copyright ©2017 by Andrew Stephen Damick. All Rights Reserved. Published by Ancient Faith Publishing

Orthodoxy, Heterodoxy, Heresy, and History 51 (who also rejected the Seventh Ecumenical Council). The addition was finally rejected at a pan-Orthodox council (including legates from Rome) in 879–880 in Constantinople, a council regarded at the time, and by some Orthodox writers later, as the Eighth Ecumenical Council. The filioque later was reinserted into the Creed by Rome and used as a charge of heresy against the Orthodox East in the Great Schism centered around the events of 1054. Barlaamism (fourteenth century)—Taught by Barlaam of Calabria, who argued against St. Gregory Palamas. Barlaam taught that the hesychastic (from hesychia, “stillness”) practices of Athonite monks did not actually allow them to see the Uncreated Light of God (i.e., God manifest as light), but rather only a created light. He also argued that mental knowledge of God was the highest possible knowledge, and that the philosophers had higher knowledge than the prophets. He was opposed by St. Gregory Palamas, whose theology was upheld at a series of synods held in Constantinople in 1341, 1347, and 1351, collectively referred to by some Orthodox writers as the Ninth Ecumenical Council. Ethnophyletism (nineteenth century)—The teaching that the ethnic character of church members should determine the administrative governance of parishes and dioceses, i.e., that certain parishes were only for Greeks or only for Bulgarians, etc. Condemned by a council in Constantinople in 1872 after the question came to a head in Constantinople, where the local Bulgarian community had established its own bishop for Bulgarians. Remembering the details of all these heresies is not the most critical thing. We should recognize, however, that heterodoxy is nothing new in Christian history and that the Church has always had means of addressing it. The ecumenical councils were convoked primarily to give a pastoral answer to the uprisings of various heresies. Having reviewed Christian history, the primary teachings of Orthodox doctrine, and the major heretical teachings in history, we will next address the largest and most tragic of all breaks in Christian history—the schism with Rome.

Sample pages only. Purchaase the full book at http://store.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxy-and-heterodoxy-finding-the-wayto-christ-in-a-complicated-religious-landscape-2017-edition/