Heresy of the week: Cerdonianism

Next week's heresy will be "part two": Marcionism.  They are closely related enough I wanted to do them in a series, but distinct enough to not put them in the same post.

Cerdonianism is a Gnosticism sect founded by Cerdo in the 2nd century. Cerdo was the teacher of Marcion, who founded Marcionism. Very little is known about this sect, other than they held fairly typical Gnosticism beliefs—two “causes”, one perfectly good and one perfectly evil. The evil “cause” created the world and was the Old Testament Jewish God. Christ is the Son of the good “cause”, and He was sent here to oppose evil, but they deny his humanity (Monophysitism). As the body and all material things are evil, they were strict Asceticism followers and had a very severe moral system which must be closely followed for “salvation” (Legalism and Pelagianism).

Heresy of the Week: Christadelphianism

This week is the last of the Adoptionism heresies.

Christadelphianism is the name for a 19th-21st century heretical church that follows Unitarianism (making it both antitrinitarian and a Pelagianism-family heresy). They now have churches in 120 countries, but a relatively small membership worldwide. They believe in rebaptism through total immersion and pacifism (Anabaptism), and they deny the Trinity (believing instead in God the Father only). They claim all their teachings are from the inerrant Bible. They believe in Jesus, but as a Father-created being, not eternal God. They believe there is no security in salvation, and that you must keep trying to live a perfect life your whole life. You will not know if you were “good enough” until the Second Coming when all mankind finds out where they spend the rest of eternity—in Hell, or on a new, transformed earth with God (they do not believe in Heaven). The Nazarenes we know today started out as Christadelphians, but separated in the late 19th century.

Heresy of the Week: Synergism

I briefly mentioned Synergism in my first Heresy of the Week post on Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism, so I thought it might be time to expand a little bit.  First, a brief overview.

Synergism is an Arminian protestant, Semi-Pelagianism-family heresy that teaches man and God work cooperatively together for salvation. In other words, God offers the salvation, but man must receive it. This is the source of the Arminian prevenient grace doctrine, which means God comes and offers salvation to the human being (who cannot come to faith without this grace being offered), but the human may then freely choose to accept or reject faith. This is similar the teaching of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches, both of whom reject total depravity of humanity and maintain that even after the Fall, humans remain free and human nature has not been totally corrupted, particularly after baptism.

Arminian theology was named after Jacobus Arminius, a 16th century Dutch theologian, who opposed John Calvin and his elimination of free will from theology.  Arminianism goes the exact opposite way from Calvinism a la Synergism--instead of predestination (or worse, double predestination), we have pure free will and the ability of a Christian to have a role in his salvation.  Both are wrong.

A review from the Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism post:

Arminianism teaches, in line with Semi-Pelagianism, that:

• It is possible to not sin (posse non peccare).
• While man is inherently sinful (Original Sin), he isn't entirely fallen and still has the opportunity to choose good (and, indeed, must choose good because God can only offer faith, man must "receive" it).
• God offers faith, but man has to "choose" to "accept" faith on their own, through "prevenient grace", which God gives to all sinners.
• Man's "role" in salvation, as a "response" to "prevenient grace", is to freely "choose" to "accept" faith in God
• Once man "accepts" faith, God justifies man and continues to give further grace to sanctify man.

The primary difference between Synergism and Semi-Pelagianism is that in the latter, man can choose to have faith without grace, whereas in the previous, man can only have choose to have faith as a "response" to "prevenient grace".

For a good analysis of the soteriology of Calvinists, Arminianists and Lutherans, read this one page document from a friend of mine, Pr. Gregory Wagner.

One thing I find interesting is that I've yet to met someone who actually claims the name Arminianist, and says that he is a Synergist.  I know many Calvinists who full TULIP or Double TULIP believers, a range of Lutherans, Catholics, etc., but I've never met an Arminainist who actually claims to be an Arminianist (I know some Weslyians, but no one who truly claims the name Arminian).  Fascinating, don't you think?  I'm sure they're out there, just not in my circle of acquaintances.  

Arminianism, or perhaps more specifically, Synergism, seems to have totally infiltrated the mega-churches and non-denominational churches in America. The focus on decision theology is proof of that.

Heresy of the Week: Asceticism

This week's heresy is often repeated in other heresies (especially Gnostic-family ones).  It's fairly simple, and deals less directly with doctrine and more with behavior (although practicers of Asceticism believed their behavior helped them earn or hurry along their salvation, which is a Pelagianism heresy as noted below, and utterly heretical).

Asceticism is the belief that abstaining from “worldly pleasure” can help bring about salvation and liberation from mortal coils. This was a common practice of some early church fathers (at least insofar as many sought to distance themselves from the world in any way they could), and is still used in some protestant churches today. This is a Legalism heresy, and by extension, a Pelagianism-family heresy as well.

The biggest issue is when focus on the Law over the Gospel becomes disproportionate.  Any teaching that you can do something to help "earn" your salvation is dangerous, because it creates distrust and despair ("Did I do enough to make sure I am saved?" or something similar should never be a question on the lips or mind of a Christian).  That is what makes Pelagianism and Pelagianistic heresies so dangerous.

Heresy of the Week: Swedenborgianism

This week's heresy is a new one to my list.  I discovered it listening to Table Talk Radio (I can't remember which episode, if I can find it, I'll link it).  It's a newer heresy.  It seems a very weird blend of Gnosticism, Pelagianism and Eastern Mysticism to me.  And yes, even Lutherans can go bad (see my previous post for comments on Pietism).  As much as I needle other denominations, I think it's both important and only fair that I air our faults as well.

Swedenborgianism, also known as the Church of the New Jerusalem, is an 18th century heresy founded by Emanuel Swedenborg. Formerly a Lutheran and a scientist, Swedenborg (like Joseph Smith) claimed a revelation from God that revealed secret knowledge to him (Gnosticism). Like Sabellianism, Swedenborg taught that God only existed in one ‘mode’ or form now: Jesus. Swedenborg’s soteriology said that believer’s had full cooperation in their salvation process (Pelagianism), and that strict obedience to commands (Legalism) is necessary for salvation. It was taught that Swedenborg was witness to the Last Judgment, and that the New Church of the Jerusalem was the result of the Last Judgment already being complete. Followers believe that all who do good, even non-believers, will be acceptable to God and taken to Heaven (God is goodness, therefore those who do good join themselves to God). Swedenborg taught that the church should be based on charity and love, not belief and doctrine.

Heresies of the Week: Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism

Semi-Pelagianism is my "favorite" heresy, not because it is good, but because it is so darn entrenched today in Christendom.

But, to better understand Semi-Pelagianism, we must first look at Pelagianism, so you actually get two heresies this week.

Pelagianism is a 4^th century heresy that denies that Original Sin tainted human nature (humanity is considered inherently good rather than fallen) and teaches that human will is able to choose good or evil without Divine aid.  It is also known as Limited Depravity.  In essence, they taught that while Adam’s sin sets a bad example, that action does not have consequences on his progeny.  The role of Jesus is to set the good example in contrast to Adam as well as providing atonement for sin.  Thus, every human has full control and responsibility for obeying the Gospel as well as for each sin.  Humans are sinners by choice; not victims of Original Sin, but criminals who need pardoning.  Mormonism is considered by some to be Pelagianist.  Pelagianism is the only heresy to also be condemned by every major sect of Protestantism as well as the Anglicans.  The Catholic Church condemned it on several occasions: Councils of Carthage (412, 416 and 418), the 431 Council of Ephesus, the 529 Council of Orange, and the 1546 Council of Trent.

In contrast, Semi-Pelagianism is a modified Pelagianism heresy which teaches that the beginning of faith is an act of free will, with grace interceding later to help grow faith (as opposed to full Pelagianism, which teaches all of faith is an act of man)—but grace is not fully needed, as man can choose to keep faith and choose good on his own.  The Roman Catholic Church’s teachings on faith (that the initiative comes from God, but man works in synergy with God through free will to come to faith) is a Semi-Pelagian teaching.  Because of their extreme emphasis on free will, Arminianism is also borderline Semi-Pelagianist (although the emphasis in Synergism is in a different order than Semi-Pelagianism).  It was originally thought to be the bridge between Augustinianism (emphasis on grace as taught by St. Augustine) and Pelagianism (emphasis on free will), but was condemned as heretical in 529 by the Second Council of Orange.  The 1577 Lutheran Epitome of the Formula of Concord also rejects Semi-Pelagianism.  

As mentioned in the description, both Roman Catholicism and Arminianism (the largest of the protestant sects as discussed in a previous post--comprising most of American protestantism, although I don't know anyone who would admit to being an Arminianist, even if they are) are at least partially Semi-Pelagian (which I will explain in further detail below).  

Before that, though, a little more about Pelagius, the heretic whose name was given to Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism.  Rev. Alex Klages wrote up a summary of Pelagius in two parts, found here and here.  Interestingly (probably because he is a Lutheran minister), he begins his post with this:

"I figured it was about time to dredge up one of the more major heretics, if for no other reason than the debate in which he and St. Augustine were engaged is still very much alive today. There are few true Pelagians, but I would assert that semi-Pelagianism is essentially the default theological position of North American culture." (emphasis mine)

Briefly, Pelagius...

• was an Irish preacher in the late 4th and early 5th centuries.
• was, by all accounts, a well-educated and pleasant man.
• wrote a well-received position on the Trinity, and was largely respect until his position on man's fallen (or lack thereof) state and his teaching that man can choose to stop sinning became known.
• made theological enemies with one of the greatest theologians, St. Augustine, over his heretical doctrine of Original Sin and the state of man.

Thank you, Google, for awesome image searches.  This appears to be the most common picture of Pelagius floating around the internet (sans the commentary on the side, which someone obviously added).  According to Wikipedia (the only source I could quickly find--and don't judge, I have several studies from my speech and debate days that say Wiki is by and large more accurate than any other encyclopaedia) this is a "17th century Calvinist print depicting Pelagius."

The controversy Pelagius started was in his answer to the following questions: 

• Can man not sin? 
• Is man inherently good or fallen?
• What is man's role in his faith and salvation?

There are essentially three positions in response to these questions: Pelagianism (1), Semi-Pelagianism (2) and Augustinianism (3) (paraphrasing Rev. Klages from his first part on Pelagius, since he so succinctly summarized this).

1. It is possible to not sin (posse non peccare).  Man is inherently good or neutral.  Man has free will in all situations to choose the spiritual correct thing.
2. It is possible to not sin (posse non peccare).  While man is inherently sinful (Original Sin), he isn't entirely fallen and still has the opportunity to choose good (more neutral).  Man has free will to "choose" and "initiate" faith apart from grace, but needs God's grace to intercede for it to grow (however, man can "choose" to keep faith apart from grace).
3. It is not possible not to sin (non posse non peccare).  Man is inherently sinful (Original Sin).  Apart from God's grace, man is unable to ever desire the spiritually correct thing.

Or, put another way (from Rev. Klages' Part Two on Pelagius):

Perhaps the best way of distinguishing between the three possible positions has to do with God’s grace vs. our part in salvation:

• Pelagian: one can be saved apart from God’s grace if one tries hard enough, although belief in Jesus makes it easier.
• Semi-Pelagian: God’s grace does most of the work, but there is always something left to the believer to “seal the deal,” whether that be personal preparation beforehand or good works after the moment of salvation.
• Augustinian: God’s grace does it all. The human will is not the determinant of salvation.

Lutheranism teaches, in line with Augustinianism, that:

• It is not possible not to sin (non posse non peccare).
• Man is inherently sinful (Original Sin).
• Apart from God's grace, man is unable to ever desire the spiritually correct thing (Isaiah 64:6).
• Because man is tainted by Original Sin and unable to desire the spiritually correct thing apart from God's grace, man has a passive rather than active role in receiving salvation.
• Man's "role" in salvation, if it may be called that, is to reject faith, not to receive it--because man can only desire spiritual evil apart from the grace of God; so no matter how much we think we would want it on our own, we cannot "choose" faith because of Original Sin... it is simply impossible to do this.

This teaching is also known as Monergism.

Conversely, Arminianism teaches, in line with Semi-Pelagianism, that:

• It is possible to not sin (posse non peccare).
• While man is inherently sinful (Original Sin), he isn't entirely fallen and still has the opportunity to choose good (and, indeed, must choose good because God can only offer faith, man must "receive" it).  
• God offers faith, but man has to "choose" to "accept" faith on their own, through "prevenient grace", which God gives to all sinners.
• Man's "role" in salvation, as a "response" to "prevenient grace", is to freely "choose" to "accept" faith in God
• Once man "accepts" faith, God justifies man and continues to give further grace to sanctify man.

The primary difference between Synergism and Semi-Pelagianism is that in the latter, man can choose to have faith without grace, whereas in the previous, man can only have choose to have faith as a "response" to "prevenient grace".  Synergism is a heresy that will be covered in further detail in a later week.

Roman Catholicism, too, teaches a modified Semi-Pelagianism, that:

• It is not possible not to sin (non posse non peccare).  
• Man is inherently sinful (Original Sin).
• Grace is the gift of God in Baptism.
• Grace overcomes the taint of Original Sin, and then, with the aid of that grace, man can choose to do the spiritually correct thing and earn a storehouse of merit sufficient to overcome the punishment for sin (i.e. one can willingly do spiritually correct things if they continue to build their storehouse of merit through penance and Communion).

Lutherans would consider this Semi-Pelagianism because it asserts that man's works help in their salvation, when, as Isaiah 64:6 says, our best works are but filthy rags.  The teachings of Purgatory and Indulgences further this Semi-Pelagian idea that we can "work off" our sins or "buy" merit that is freely given in faith and already sufficient from Christ.

Calvinism is usually considered to teach Monergism, which is largely correct (although an incorrect form of Monergism), but many Calvinist/Reformed churches are extremely Legalistic.  Legalism is another form of Semi-Pelagianism, because it teaches that you must keep the Law in order to be "good enough" for salvation.  This form of works-righteousness is certainly in the vein of Semi-Pelagianism, even if they correctly teach of man's total depravity (in their case, before salvation).

Rev. Klages' Second Part on Pelagius has other good examples of the prevalence of Semi-Pelagianism in the modern church (and has been an excellent resource for my post, thanks to Pr. Snyder for suggesting that blog!).  To assemble my initial summaries, I used largely the writings of Early Church Fathers (specifically, St. Augustine in this case) and New Advent, which while Catholic, is an excellent resource overall on heresies.

While there is nothing new under the sun, most heresies have died out by now and future "Heresy of the Week" posts will likely be shorter and from a more historic perspective (rather than tying them into the modern church).