# What Defines Orthodoxy?



## Roldan (Jun 27, 2006)

And, does this orthodoxy define what is heresy?

My answer would be the creeds and reformed confessions.


----------



## Roldan (Jun 27, 2006)

Maybe I'm just hyper-reformed?


----------



## Roldan (Jun 27, 2006)

in light of no responses or comments I assume that I'm right?

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## DTK (Jun 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Roldan_
> in light of no responses or comments I assume that I'm right?


I think I have a high view of our creeds and reformed confessions, but I don't think that we can rely on them ultimately to define heresy. For the Westminster Confession of Faith itself directs us in this manner...


> WCF: 1:10 The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be *determined*, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined; *and in whose sentence we are to rest; can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.*


I find this to be true of the patristic witness by and large as well. Here are just a few...

*Tertullian (c. 160-c. 220):* And even if Matter had previously existed, we must have believed that it had been really made by God, since we maintained (no less) when we held the rule of faith to be, that nothing except God was uncreated. Up to this point there is room for controversy, until Matter is brought to the test of the Scriptures, and fails to make good its case. _ANF: Vol. III, Against Hermogenes_, Chapter 33.
*Latin text:* et ex materia non constat: quae etiam si fuisset, ipsam quoque a Deo factam credidissemus, quia nihil innatum praeter Deum praescribentes, obtineremus. In hunc usque articulum locus est retractatui, donec ad Scripturas provocata deficiat, exhibitio materiae. Tertullian, _Adversus Hermogenem_, Caput XXXIII, PL 2:228.

*Hilary of Poitiers (c. 315-67):* To assure ourselves of the needfulness of these two phrases, adopted and employed as the best of safeguards against the heretical rabble of that day, I think it best to reply to the obstinate misbelief of our present heretics, and refute their vain and pestilent teaching by the witness of the evangelists and apostles. They flatter themselves that they can furnish a proof for each of their propositions; they have, in fact, appended to each some passages or other from holy Writ; passages so grossly misinterpreted as to ensnare none but the illiterate by the semblance of truth with which perverted ingenuity has masked their explanation. _NPNF2: Vol. IX, On The Trinity_, Book IV, Â§7. 

*Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335-95):* They charge us with preaching three Gods, and din into the ears of the multitude this slander, which they never rest from maintaining persuasively. Then truth fights on our side, for we show both publicly to all men, and privately to those who converse with us, that we anathematize any man who says that there are three Gods, and hold him to be not even a Christian. Then, as soon as they hear this, they find Sabellius a handy weapon against us, and the plague that he spread is the subject of continual attacks upon us. Once more, we oppose to this assault our wonted armour of truth, and show that we abhor this form of heresy just as much as Judaism. What then? are they weary after such efforts, and content to rest? Not at all. Now they charge us with innovation, and frame their complaint against us in this way:"”They allege that while we confess three Persons we say that there is one goodness, and one power, and one Godhead. And in this assertion they do not go beyond the truth; for we do say so. *But the ground of their complaint is that their custom does not admit this, and Scripture does not support it. What then is our reply? We do not think that it is right to make their prevailing custom the law and rule of sound doctrine. For if custom is to avail for proof of soundness, we too, surely, may advance our prevailing custom; and if they reject this, we are surely not bound to follow theirs. Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words.* _NPNF2: Vol. V, On the Holy Trinity, and of the Godhead of the Holy Spirit_, second paragraph. (Virtually the same paragraph is found word for word in a letter by Basil of Caesarea (AD. 329-379, _NPNF2: Vol. VIII, Letters_, Letter 189, Â§3.), which most patristic scholars now attribute to his brother Gregory of Nyssa as cited above. I checked the Greek versions of the two letters, and they are word for word the same in the pertinent paragraph. 

*Optatus, bishop of Milevis (wrote 366/367):* You say, "œit is granted;" we say, "œit is not granted." Between your "œit is granted" and our "œit is not granted" the souls of the people tack and veer. Let no-one believe you, no-one believe us; all of us are people at loggerheads. Judges must be sought; if Christians, neither side can give them, because truth is hindered by zeal. A judge must be sought from those without; if a pagan, he cannot know the secrets of Christians, if a Jew, he is an enemy of Christian baptism; *therefore in the world no judgment on this matter can be found; a judge must be sought from heaven.
But why do we batter heaven, when we have here a testament in the Gospel?* For in this place earthly things can rightly be compared to heavenly ones. The case is the same as with any person who has a lot of children: so long as the father is present the father himself commands them individually; no testament is necessary yet. And so too Christ, so long as he was present in the world, while he was not yet wanting, gave whatever commands were necessary for the time to his disciples. *But when an earthly father feels himself to be on the brink of death, fearing lest after his death the brothers should break the peace and be at odds, he brings witnesses and transfers his will from his dying breast to tablets which will last a long time; and if any dispute arises among the brothers, they do not go to the burial-place, but seek the testament, and the one who rests in the burial-place speaks silently from the tablets; just so, the one whose testament [the Gospel] is alive in heaven, and therefore let his will be sought in the Gospel, as in a testament.* Mark Edwards, trans. and ed., _Optatus: Against the Donatists_, Book 5, Â§3 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1997), p. 100. 
*Latin text:* Vos dicitis, licet: nos dicimus, non licet: inter licet vestrum, et non licet nostrum, nutant et remigant animae populorum. Nemo vobis credat, nemo nobis: omnes contentiosi homines sumus. Quaerendi sunt judices: si Christiani, de utraque parte dari non possunt; quia studiis veritas impeditur. De foris quaerendus est judex: si paganus, non potest Christiana nosse secreta: si Judaeus, inimicus est Christiani baptismatis: ergo in terris de hac re nullum poterit reperiri judicium; de coelo quaerendus est judex. Sed ut quid pulsamus ad coelum, cum habeamus hic in Evangelio testamentum? Quia hoc loco recte possunt terrena coelestibus comparari: tale est quod quivis hominum habens numerosos filios, quamdiu pater praesens est, ipse imperat singulis; non est adhuc necessarium testamentum: sic et Christus, quamdiu praesens in terris fuit (quamvis nec modo desit), pro tempore quidquid necessarium erat Apostolis imperavit. Sed quomodo terrenus pater, dum se in confinio senserit mortis, timens ne post mortem suam, rupta pace, litigent fratres, adhibitis testibus, voluntatem suam de pectore morituro transfert in tabulas diu duraturas: et si fuerit inter fratres nata contentio, non itur ad tumulum, sed quaeritur testamentum: et qui in tumulo quiescit, tacitus de tabulis loquitur. Vivus, cujus est testamentum, in coelo est: ergo voluntas ejus, velut in testamento, sic in Evangelio requiratur. _S. Optati libri septem de Schismate Donatistarum_, Liber Quintus, Â§3, PL 11:1048-1049.

*Ambrose (c. 339-97):* The Arians, then, say that Christ is unlike the Father; we deny it. Nay, indeed, we shrink in dread from the word. Nevertheless I would not that your sacred Majesty should trust to argument and our disputation. Let us enquire of the Scriptures, of apostles, of prophets, of Christ. In a word, let us enquire of the Father, Whose honor these men say they uphold, if the Son be judged inferior to Him, But insult to the Son brings no honor to the good Father. It cannot please the good Father, if the Son be judged inferior, rather than equal, to His Father. _NPNF2: Vol. X, Exposition of the Christian Faith_, Book 1, Chapter 6, Â§43.

*Ambrose (c. 339-97):* The heretical objection, that the Son cannot be equal to the Father, because He cannot beget a Son, is turned back upon the authors of it. From the case of human nature it is shown that whether a person begets offspring or not, has nothing to do with his power. Most of all must this be true since, otherwise, the Father Himself would have to be pronounced wanting in power. Whence it follows that we have no right to judge of divine things by human, and must take our stand upon the authority of Holy Writ, otherwise we must deny all power either to the Father or to the Son. _NPNF2: Vol. X, Exposition of the Christian Faith_, Book 4, Chapter 8.

*Jerome (347-420):* Give me any churchman trained in divine Scripture. Let Eunomius come, let Arius come and try to adduce anything from the prophets against us, does not our churchman stand firm as a bar? Does he not refute them with the fixed firmness of a bar? _FC, Vol. 48, The Homilies of St. Jerome: Vol. 1, On the Psalms_, Homily 57 (Washington D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1964), p. 409.

*Jerome (347-420):* For all questions, let us seek for suitable beams from the testimonies of the Scriptures, and cut them down, and build the house of wisdom within us. William Goode, _The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice_, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p. 151. 
*Latin text:* ad singula problemata, congrua de testimoniis Scripturarum ligna quaerentes, praecidamus ea, et aedificemus domum sapientiae in nobis: postquam enim haec fuerit exstructa, finis aedificationis ejus erit, ut Dominus glorificetur in nobis. _Commentariorum In Aggaeum Prophetam_,1:17-18, PL 25:1396.

*Augustine (354-430):* What does "œhomoousios" mean, I ask, but The Father and I are one (Jn. 10:30)? I should not, however, introduce the Council of Nicea to prejudice the case in my favor, nor should you introduce the Council of Ariminum that way. I am not bound by the authority of Ariminum, and you are not bound by that of Nicea. By the authority of the scriptures that are not the property of anyone, but the common witness for both of us, let position do battle with position, case with case, reason with reason. John E. Rotelle, O.S.A., ed., _WSA, Arianism and Other Heresies, Answer to Maximinus the Arian_, Book II:XIV.3, Part 1, Vol. 18, trans. Roland J. Teske, S.J. (Hyde Park: New City Press, 1995), p. 282. 
*Latin text:* Quid est enim Homousion, nisi unius ejusdemque substantiae? Quid est, inquam, Homousion, nisi, Ego et Pater unum sumus? Sed nunc nec ego Nicaenum, nec tu debes Ariminense tanquam praejudicaturus proferre concilium. Nec ego hujus auctoritate, nec tu illius detineris: Scripturarum auctoritatibus, non quorumque propriis, sed utrisque communibus testibus, res cum re, causa cum causa, ratio cum ratione concertet. _Contra Maximinum_, Liber Secundus, Caput XIV.3, PL 42:772. 

In the following 12 quotes, all of which are drawn from Augustine´s work on the _Unity of the Church_ show that Augustine, in his dispute with the Donatists, made his appeal to the Scriptures alone. His argumentation exemplifies a vast difference between himself and the Roman controversialists of our present day.

*Augustine (354-430):* Let us not hear, You say this, I say that; but let us hear Thus saith the Lord. There are the Dominical books, whose authority we both acknowledge, we both yield to, we both obey; there let us seek the Church, there let us discuss the question between us. William Goode, _The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice_, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p 164.
*Latin text:* Sed, ut dicere coeperam, non audiamus, Haec dicis, haec dico; sed audiamus, Haec dicit Dominus. Sunt certe Libri dominici, quorum auctoritati utrique consentimus, utrique cedimus utrique servimus: ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam, ibi discutiamus causam nostram. _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput III, Â§5, PL 43:394.

*Augustine (354-430):* Therefore let those testimonies which we mutually bring against each other, from any other quarter than the divine canonical books, be put out of sight. Goode, Vol. 3, p. 164.
*Latin text:* Auferantur ergo illa de medio, quae adversus nos invicem, non ex divinis canonicis Libris, sed aliunde recitamus. _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput III, Â§5, PL 43:395.

*Augustine (354-430):* I would not have the holy Church demonstrated by human testimonies, but by divine oracles. Goode, Vol. 3, pp. 164-165.
*Latin text:* Quia nolo humanis documentis, sed divinis oraculis sanctam Ecclesiam demonstrari. _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput III, Â§6, PL 43:395.

*Augustine (354-430):* Whoever dissents from the sacred Scriptures, even if they are found in all places in which the church is designated, are not the church. See Francis Turretin, _Institutes of Elenctic Theology_, 3 Vols., trans. George Musgrave Giger and ed. James T. Dennison (Phillipsburg: reprinted by Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1992), Vol. 3, pp. 109-110. 
*Latin text:* Quicumque de ipso capite, ab Scripturis sanctis dissentiunt, etiamsi in omnibus locis inveniantur in quibus Ecclesia designata est, non sunt in Ecclesia. _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput IV, Â§7, PL 43:395-396.

*Augustine (354-430):* We adhere to this Church; against those divine declarations we admit no human cavils.
*Latin text:* Nos hanc Ecclesiam tenemus, contra istas divinas voces nullas humanas criminationes admittimus. _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput XI, Â§28, PL 43:410.

*Augustine (354-430):* Let no one say to me, What hath Donatus said, what hath Parmenian said, or Pontius, or any of them. For we must not allow even Catholic bishops, if at any time, perchance, they are in error, to hold any opinion contrary to the Canonical Scriptures of God. Goode, Vol. 3, p. 165.
*Latin text:* Nemo mihi dicat: O quid dixit Donatus, o quid dixit Parmenianus, aut Pontius, aut quilibet illorum! Quia nec catholicis episcopis consentiendum est, sicubi forte falluntur, ut contra canonicas Dei Scripturas aliquid sentiant. _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput XI, Â§28, PL 43:410-411.

*Augustine (354-430):* All such matters, therefore, being put out of sight, let them show their Church, if they can; not in the discourses and reports of Africans, not in the councils of their own bishops, not in the writings of any controversialists, not in fallacious signs and miracles, for even against these we are rendered by the word of the Lord prepared and cautious, but in the ordinances of the Law, in the predictions of the Prophets, in the songs of the Psalms, in the words of the very Shepherd himself, in the preachings and labours of the Evangelists, that is, in all the canonical authorities of sacred books. Nor so as to collect together and rehearse those things that are spoken obscurely, or ambiguously, or figuratively, such as each can interpret as he likes, according to his own views. For such testimonies cannot be rightly understood and expounded, unless those things that are most clearly spoken are first held by a firm faith. Goode, Vol. 3, p. 165.
*Latin text:* Remotis ergo omnibus talibus Ecclesiam suam demonstrent, si possunt, non in sermonibus et rumoribus Afrorum, non in conciliis episcoporum suorum, non in litteris quorumlibet disputatorum, non in signis et prodigiis fallacibus, quia etiam contra ista verbo Domini praeparati et cauti redditi sumus: sed in praescripto Legis, in Prophetarum praedictis, in Psalmorum cantibus, in ipsius unius Pastoris vocibus, in Evangelistarum praedicationibus et laboribus, hoc est, in omnibus canonicis sanctorum Librorum auctoritatibus. Nec ita, ut ea colligant et commemorent, quae obscure vel ambigue vel figurate dicta sunt, quae quisque sicut voluerit, interpretetur secundum sensum suum. Talia enim recte intelligi exponique non possunt, nisi prius ea, quae apertissime dicta sunt, firma fide teneantur. _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput XVIII, Â§47, PL 43:427-428.

*Augustine (354-430):* We ought to find the Church, as the Head of the Church, in the Holy Canonical Scriptures, not to inquire for it in the various reports, and opinions, and deeds, and words, and visions of men. Goode, Vol. 3, p. 165.
*Latin text:* Ecclesia, quam sicut ipsum caput in Scripturis sanctis canonicis debemus agnoscere, non in variis hominum rumoribus, et opinionibus, et factis, et dictis, et visis inquirere. _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput XIX, Â§49, PL 43:429.

*Augustine (354-430):* Whether they [i.e. the Donatists] hold the Church, they must show by the Canonical books of the Divine Scriptures alone; for we do not say, that we must be believed because we are in the Church of Christ, because Optatus of Milevi, or Ambrose of Milan, or innumerable other bishops of our communion, commended that Church to which we belong, or because it is extolled by the Councils of our colleagues, or because through the whole world in the holy places which those of our communion frequent such wonderful answers to prayers or cures happen. See Goode, Vol. 2, pp. 341-342 and Vol. 3, p. 165. 
*Latin text:* Augustine: Sed utrum ipsi Ecclesiam teneant, non nisi de divinarum Scripturarum canonicis libris ostendant: quia nec nos propterea dicimus nobis credi oportere quod in Ecclesia Christi sumus, quia ipsam quam tenemus, commendavit Milevitanus Optatus, vel Mediolanensis Ambrosius, vel alii innumerabiles nostrae communionis episcopi; aut quia nostrorum collegarum conciliis ipsa praedicata est; aut quia per totum orbem in locis sanctis, quae frequentat nostra communio, tanta mirabilia vel exauditionum, vel sanitatum fiunt . . . _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput XIX, Â§50, PL 43:429-430.

*Augustine (354-430):* Whatever things of this kind take place in the Catholic Church, are therefore to be approved of because they take place in the Catholic Church; but it is not proved to be the Catholic Church, because these things happen in it. The Lord Jesus himself when he had risen from the dead . . . judged that his disciples were to be convinced by the testimonies of the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms . . . These are the proofs, these the foundations, these the supports for our cause. We read in the Acts of the Apostles of some who believed, that they searched the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so. What Scriptures but the Canonical Scriptures of the Law and the Prophets? To these have been added the Gospels, the Apostolical Epistles, the Acts of the Apostles, the Apocalypse of John. See Goode, Vol. 2, pp. 341-342 and Vol. 3, pp. 165-166. 
*Latin text:* Quaecumque talia in Catholica fiunt, ideo sunt approbanda, quia in Catholica fiunt; non ideo ipsa manifestatur Catholica, quia haec in ea fiunt. Ipse Dominus Jesus cum resurrexisset a mortuis,...eos [i.e., discipulos] testimoniis Legis et Prophetarum et Psalmorum confirmandos esse judicavit,...Haec sunt causae nostrae documenta, haec fundamenta, haec firmamenta. 51. Legimus in Actibus Apostolorum dictum de quibusdam credentibus, quod quotidie scrutarentur Scripturas, an haec ita se haberent: quas utique Scripturas, nisi canonicas Legis et Prophetarum? Huc accesserunt Evangelia, apostolicae Epistolae, Actus Apostolorum, Apocalypsis Joannis. _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput XIX, Â§50-51, PL 43:430.

*Augustine (354-430):* But if they do not choose to understand, it is sufficient for us that we adhere to that Church which is demonstrated by such extremely clear testimonies of the Holy and Canonical Scriptures. See Goode, Vol. 3, p. 166. 
*Latin text:* Quod si nolunt intelligere, sufficit nobis quod eam tenemus Ecclesiam, quae manifestissimis sanctarum et canonicarum Scripturarum testimoniis demonstratur. _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput XIX, Â§50-51, PL 43:437.

*Augustine (354-430):* (Turretin trans.) I have the most manifest voice of my pastor commending to me, and without any hesitation setting forth the church, I will impute it to myself, if I shall wish to be seduced by the words of men and to wander from his flock, which is the church itself, since he specially admonished me saying, My sheep hear my voice and follow me; listen to his voice clear and open and heard; who does not follow, how will he dare to call himself his sheep? (Goode trans.) Let no one say to me, What hath Donatus said, what hath Parmenian said, or Pontius, or any of them. For we must not allow even Catholic bishops, if at any time, perchance, they are in error, to hold any opinion contrary to the Canonical Scriptures of God. Turretin, Vol. 3, pp. 91-92 and Goode, Vol. 3, p. 165.
*Latin text:* Habeo manifestissimam vocem pastoris mei, commendantis mihi et sine ullis ambagibus exprimentis Ecclesiam: mihi imputabo si ab ejus grege, quod est ipsa Ecclesia, per verba hominum seduci atque aberrare voluero; cum me praesertim admonuerit dicens, Quae sunt oves meae, vocem meam audiunt et sequuntur me (Joan. X, 27). Ecce vox ejus clara et aperta: hac audita qui eum non sequitur, quomodo se ovem ejus dicere audebit? Nemo mihi dicat: O quid dixit Donatus, o quid dixit Parmenianus, aut Pontius, aut quilibet illorum! Quia nec catholicis episcopis consentiendum est, sicubi forte falluntur, ut contra canonicas Dei Scripturas aliquid sentiant. _De Unitate Ecclesiae_, Caput XI, Â§28, PL 43:410-411.

*Salvian the Presbyter (@400-480):* My speech and authority are small for putting forth an opinion about a question of this nature. Therefore, let us see what the language of the Holy Books and the words of the heavenly precepts pronounce about these questions. Then, most rightly, will I direct the rule of my opinion according to the norm given by God. _FC, Vol. 3, The Writings of Salvian, The Presbyter, The Four Books of Timothy to the Church_, Book 2, Â§4 (New York: CIMA Publishing Co., Inc., 1947), p. 298.

*Justus, Bishop of Urgel (6th Century):* Convince heretics, and restrain their subtleties and crafts, with the testimonies of the Holy Scriptures. See Jeremy Taylor, _The Works of_, Vol. 3 (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1853), p. 334.
*Latin text:* convincite haereticos, eorumque versutias sanctarum Scripturarum concludite testimoniis. _In Cantica Canticorum Salomonis_, Cap. II, Num. 51, PL 67:973.

Now, some will perhaps argue that this simply makes more nasty the work of defining heresy; and to be sure, it must be worked out in the courts of Christ's Church. But unless we are willing to go on record as denying that Holy Scripture alone is our _norma normans non normata_, then I think we are proceeding down an even more slippery path. And even with our creedal affirmations, we need always to be ready to go back to the Scriptures and demonstrate how they are undergirded by the same. For even as Augustine cautions us regarding conciliar authority...


> *Augustine (354-430):* But who can fail to be aware that the sacred canon of Scripture, both of the Old and New Testament, is confined within its own limits, and that it stands so absolutely in a superior position to all later letters of the bishops, that about it we can hold no manner of doubt or disputation whether what is confessedly contained in it is right and true; but that all the letters of bishops which have been written, or are being written, since the closing of the canon, are liable to be refuted if there be anything contained in them which strays from the truth, either by the discourse of some one who happens to be wiser in the matter than themselves, or by the weightier authority and more learned experience of other bishops, by the authority of Councils; and further, that the Councils themselves, which are held in the several districts and provinces, must yield, beyond all possibility of doubt, to the authority of plenary Councils which are formed for the whole Christian world; and that even of the plenary (ecumenical) Councils, the earlier are often corrected by those which follow them, when, by some actual experiment, things are brought to light which were before concealed, and that is known which previously lay hid, and this without any whirlwind of sacrilegious pride, without any puffing of the neck through arrogance, without any strife of envious hatred, simply with holy humility, catholic peace, and Christian charity? _NPNF1: Vol. IV, On Baptism, Against the Donatists_, Book II, Chapter 3.



DTK


----------



## yeutter (Jun 27, 2006)

Orthodoxy should be defined as adherence to the truth that has everywhere and always been agreed upon. The summary of this truth can be found in the Apostles, Nicene and Chalcedon creeds.

I would define a heresy as an understanding of a theological issue that is at variance with the oecumenical creeds. 

Other errors, I call just that: error.

I would distinguish between what I call heresy and what I call error.


----------



## DTK (Jun 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by yeutter_
> Orthodoxy should be defined as adherence to the truth that has everywhere and always been agreed upon. The summary of this truth can be found in the Apostles, Nicene and Chalcedon creeds.


Then, by this standard, the doctrine of the predestination of the saints cannot be defined as orthodox. 

DTK


----------



## fredtgreco (Jun 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by DTK_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by yeutter_
> ...



Or justification by faith alone.


----------



## MW (Jun 27, 2006)

Both sound right to me. DTL is correct from the magisterial context. Yeutter is correct from the ministerial context.


----------



## yeutter (Jun 27, 2006)

You are right. The definition I used would not be sufficient.

Thanks, Pastor King.


----------

