Heretics: The Creation of Christianity from the Gnostics to the Modern Church

 

Heretics: The Creation of Christianity from the Gnostics to the Modern Church by Jonathan Wright

Heretic.  Along with words like “witch”, “demonic”, or “infidel”, this word spurs a high level of uncomfortableness amongst the faithful.  On closer examination, though, the definition of “heretic” is defined as “anyone who does not conform to an established attitude, doctrine, or principle”.  O.K. fair enough, but when put in the context of two-thousand plus years of Christianity, when was there ever a clear-cut “established attitude, doctrine, or principle”?  This is essentially the theme running through this excellent read by Jonathan Wright.

In many ways, this book is an excellent retrospective of the many conflicts throughout the history of Christianity. Wright makes a solid argument that, whatever a Christian believes, a different Christian somewhere is likely to have a conflicting opinion, and controversy will likely arise.  So essentially, we’re all “heretics” in someone else’s eyes.  We must also remember that throughout the history of the church, even in its earliest days, there was never really a consensus of belief among the masses.  Even Jesus himself would have been deemed a “heretic” by the definitions of Judaism during his time.

What many Christians don’t realize is that the four gospels and the majority of the epistles weren’t even written until 30 – 60 years after Jesus finished his earthly ministry and ascended into Heaven.  It was a few hundred MORE years after, that an official canonized version of scripture (what we know as “The Bible”) made it to the scene.  So how did over 300 years of professing Christians know exactly what they were supposed to believe?  Well, in a word, they didn’t.  Consider the nature of Christ: The common believe among Christians today is that Jesus was both fully human and fully God.  There were many back then that didn’t believe that.  Before we get too angry, we must remember that most of these individuals couldn’t even read let alone get possession of scrolls of scripture.   There were movements like the Docetists, who believed that Jesus was actually ALL God and not so much human.  On the other side of the coin, you had the followers of Arius who deviated from the norm and believed that Christ, although God, was a “creation” of the Father, and certainly didn’t exist forever.  So there was already trouble brewing and conflicting opinions during this early time. 

Depending on the politics and however the wind happened to be blowing, those in the leadership position could pick an individual, movement, or belief of said individual and cry “heretic”.  Sadly, this was often a death sentence for the offenders.  And the death was never pleasant. We read constant instances of people being burnt at the stake; often with “green branches” to prolong the agony.  There are even a few anecdotes of “heretics” who had already died, so the powers that be would dig up the corpse and THEN burn them.  The author takes us through about 1700 years or so of such behavior and episodes.  In many ways this book is a history book, and in this case the history wasn’t often pretty.

Once our narrative gets to the eighteenth century, the story slows down and then stops rather abruptly.  The author essentially tells us that it was around this time that the persecutions essentially stopped and, while there were still differences of opinion (many hotly debated), there was (and thankfully still is) a stronger desire to live and let live as opposed to executing those with different beliefs with chopping blocks and thumbscrews.  To be honest, I wished the author would have kept the momentum going and discussed the many conflicts that still exist today among the different camps, but the author specifically states that this was never his intention and is way beyond the scope of his underlying thesis.

It’s still quite interesting to see the many definitions of “heresy/heretic” throughout the centuries, and we even see that such name-calling and egg-throwing often depends on who (usually the Pope) is in charge at the particular time.  We learn that Francis of Assisi is a great example.  The Catholic church regards him as one of their most honored and benevolent saints, yet we’re shown that similar individuals that existed at different times with the same thoughts and agendas were loudly disdained and sent to the proverbial woodshed.   Interesting, yet sad.  Well, history is not always pretty, and we should never try to make it so.

Another thing I thoroughly enjoyed about the book was the author’s writing style. Now, I would advise that you read this book on an e-device, since you can hold your finger down on an unfamiliar word to get the definition. If not reading an electronic copy, ensure you have a dictionary close by.  There are a LOT of big, unfamiliar words within this text, yet I still really enjoyed the author’s prose.  Although in most cases, it’s advised not to use a sophisticated word when a simpler one will do, the rich style here really added to the enjoyment.  There were many times when I couldn’t suppress a guffaw simply because of how the author chose to get his point across to his reader.  In fact, he seemed to have a light, almost humorous touch when discuss some topics.  That would almost seem insensitive due to the subject matter, but it never came across this way.  In fact, I’m tempted to read his few other works, not because the subject matter necessarily interests me, but I felt personally enriched by his writing.

A very good, if somewhat sad, read.