Heresy Judgement and Criteria

 

What are the criteria for judging heresy?

 

What are the criteria for judging heresy?

 

The topic of 'heresy' is a hot potato within the Christian community in Korea. Recently, numerous Christian groups have grappled with heresy issues. The Church carries the grave responsibility of discerning heresy and condemning it. 

 

Above all, the legitimacy of the criteria and authority for judging heresy need to be clearly defined. In this regard, examining the history of dissent can help us understand heresy and serve as a good guide for building a sound Christian faith.

 

The mission of the Church to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ demands a persistent attitude toward heresy. However, heresy condemnation can harm faithful Christians due to its unwavering nature. 

 

Church history attests that the biases and misjudgments of powerful church groups have inflicted terrible harm upon the children of God, whom Christ redeemed through His shed blood.

 

The Church has historically condemned orthodox Christians as heretics. Prominent figures who suffered include Athanasius, Peter Waldo, John Wycliffe, Jan Hus, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, and more. Professor Gresham Machen in the United States and reverend Joo Ki-Chul in Korea were "great heretics."

 

The heresy condemnation within denominational systems is even more precarious. Some heresy inquisitions performed as the oppression of groups that have seized church power. What one group labels as heretics, another group may not. The motivations and criteria for heresy judgment within the Church do not align.

 

In 2016, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Korea (Tonghap) declared amnesty for four individuals the Church had previously condemned as heretics. They initially announced judgment in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit but later revoked it due to public criticism. They made heresy judgments in the name of the triune God and revoked them because of public pressure. 

 

Such events undermine the Church's authority tasked with the duty of heresy condemnation and promote a "heresy condemnation futility" within the Church. This case suggests that heresy condemnation continues unjustly today.

 

The Korean Society of Christianity and the Korean Evangelical Society, both academic and theological societies, held a joint conference on "heresy" 2014 in Seoul. Theologians presented ten academic papers on the theme. The author presented an article titled "Medieval Church Heresy Condemnation: Self-Righteousness and Reciprocal Opposition."

 

The author confirmed on that day that there was an indulgent attitude toward alleged heretics among progressive theologians and those in the evangelical tradition. They were critical of the Church's politically motivated heresy judgment and condemnation. One New Testament scholar from Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Seoul(Tonghap group), who presented the paper that day, emphasized various Christian sects and so-called heresies even within the New Testament.

 

The theologians of the academic conference seriously consider the limits of human understanding and acknowledge the diversity of theology and biblical interpretation. They maintain a humble scholarly attitude, despise the Church's careless condemnation, and reject heresy condemnation motivated by politics rather than truth. They cautioned against the activities of hasty "heresy discerners" or "heresy judgers" who lack prudence.

 

The following year, the author presented an academic paper titled "John Wesley's Tolerance of Heresy" at the Korean Evangelical Society(2015). The theologians who attended the conference were concerned about the trend of heresy judgment within and around the Church carelessly. They criticized the activities of "heresy discerners" or "heresy judgers" who had lost control.

 

The author's reflections on tolerance toward heresy and attitude led to the following five considerations:

 

First, criteria. It is essential to have clear measuring standards for what is orthodox and why someone is heresy.

 

Second, a firm understanding of the subject of heresy discernment. Does any church have the authority to discern and condemn those outside their group or members of other denominations as heretics based on specific criteria?

 

It is thirdly recognizing that there may be "heretical" groups or "heretics" who have been labeled unfairly as such in and around the Korean Church. There is a need for self-reflection on the part of churches that have condemned "saved heretics," Christians who are children of God.

 

Fourth, there is a need for inter-denominational heresy judgment bodies such as a "Council of Theologians." A council of scholars with academic rigor and unity can enhance the credibility of the Church's heresy discernment.

 

Fifth, when a heresy condemnation reflects a misjudgment, the Church that issued the judgment should compensate the victims or victimized groups. Seeking forgiveness and expressing a mutual commitment to serve as part of the universal body of Christ is necessary.

 

Heresy discernment and condemnation driven by church power and the group's self-protection motives are unjust. Only heresy judgment for protecting God's special revelation, that is, the Bible, the truth of salvation, and the gospel of Jesus Christ, is legitimate. The criteria for heresy discernment are the Bible and truthfulness.

 

Whose duty is to discern or judge the heresy? Is it the Church as an organization? Is the condemnation of prominent heretics and the excommunication of Protestant reformers by the Roman Catholic Church, done with absolute authority, just? Who has 'the authority' to judge the orthodoxy and heresy of individuals, communities, and church groups?

 

The Church has the power and authority to judge and condemn. Is the Church's power and authority to condemn heresy unconditional and absolute? Empathy is unnecessary for officially recognized heretics who have historically deviated from Christian orthodoxy and heretics. There is no need to show concern for groups with no intention of correcting their errors.

 

Our concern should be for the "saved heretics," Christians who are children of God. These fellow Christians are ostracized as heretics for political reasons, minor mistakes, or ignorance, even though they do not seriously deviate from the Bible and the truth. Because of the firmness of heresy condemnation, "saved heretics" suffer because of their political isolation and exclusion by the Church.

 

The modern era expects to care for socially weak persons. Nevertheless, are there no "great heretics" or "saved heretics" who suffer from the Church's "oppression" within and around the Church today? A profound discussion on the criteria and who has the authority to judge heresy is more urgent now than ever.

 

 

 

Rev. Doug Choi, Ph.D., President of Peniel Theological Seminary, Busan, Korea