The Narrow Path Ministries

Just curious -- has there ever been a council that affirmed a controversial or supposedly heretical doctrine?

darinhouston wrote:Just curious -- has there ever been a council that affirmed a controversial or supposedly heretical doctrine?

Probably all of the church councils affirmed controversial doctrines. The reason they met was to debate existing controversies and to hammer out (affirm) positions for the "church" to stand on. "Heresy" lost every time, and "orthodoxy" was never defeated.

Candlepower wrote:

darinhouston wrote:Just curious -- has there ever been a council that affirmed a controversial or supposedly heretical doctrine?

Probably all of the church councils affirmed controversial doctrines. The reason they met was to debate existing controversies and to hammer out (affirm) positions for the "church" to stand on. "Heresy" lost every time, and "orthodoxy" was never defeated.

Haha -- funny. I'm serious. They didn't come into the councils on equal footing. I suspect they never said "hey, on second thought -- this new theory causing such a stir makes sense. We've been wrong."

Well, if the Pope counts (aren't they better than a council? )there have been Popes who reversed what others have declared. One Pope even denied papal infallibilty.

History is written by the winners, and so is orthodoxy.

This is caused by at least two different areas.

First, the decisions of which books to allow into the canon weights certain doctrines in a particular direction. Imagine if John, Hebrews, James and The Revelation weren't included in the canon how many doctrinal positions would be handled differently.

Second, the interpretation of seeming contradictions. The reason we fight over orthodoxy is because we disagree about how to interpret passages that say one thing here and another thing there. Orthodoxy regarding the trinity, the divinity of Jesus, Eschatology, Salvation, Predestination, Atonement et al. is determined by whoever thinks they have scripture in their favor. Some of these positions were codified in the councils, and as such, disagreement of those is considered heresy. But had it gone in different directions, then the trinity might be considered heresy. Again, what if the early church decided that the gospel of John was spurious and thus didn't use it to debate the trinity? How might things be different.

Lost Christianities by Barth Ehrman is a good read on the subject. I'm certain he is considered a bad source here (that's a different discussion that I'd enjoy having), but the book provides exposure to a different viewpoint.