On "Self-Condemnation" (Titus 3:10-11)

 Commentary on Titus 3:10-11

By St. Jerome (Hieronymus) of Stridon

3.10–11.   Avoid a heretical man after one rebuke, knowing that his sort is ruined and is a transgressor, who is self-condemned.  The term “heresy” is recorded in the epistle to the Corinthians: “For it is necessary that there be heresies among you, that those who are approved may become manifest.” [1 Cor 11.19] And to the Galatians it is listed among the works of the flesh: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, what they are: fornication, uncleanness, excess, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, contentions, strife, wrath, quarrels, dissentions, heresies, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and other similar things, which I declare to you in advance, just as I said before, that those who do these things will not possess the kingdom of God.” [Gal 5.19–21] In these things, one must carefully observe that just as the other vices that are enumerated among the works of the flesh exclude us from the kingdom of God, so also “heresies” take away the kingdom of God from us. And it does not matter how, only that someone is excluded from the kingdom.

Now what may be rather surprising is what seems to require a rereading from the Acts of the Apostles, that our faith in Christ and in the Church’s instruction already then was called a “heresy” by perverse men. The Jews say to the apostle Paul, “For we have received no letter from you about Judea, nor have any of the brothers come and declared to us, nor has anyone spoken of you in respect to evil. But we seek to hear from you what you think, for this “heresy” is known to us, since everywhere it is spoken against.” [Acts 28.21–22.] And although in Miletus the term “heresy” is not mentioned by Paul, nevertheless its works are identified, when he says to the priests of the church, “I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come among you, not sparing the flock; and men from your very midst will arise speaking perverse things, to lead away disciples behind them.” [Acts 20.29–30] These things would have been said in passing, when even elsewhere heresy was named. Now it appears that the term itself needs to be very fully displayed. 

Heresy is the Greek word for choice, namely, because each one chooses for himself what seems better to him. The philosophers, too, the Stoics, Peripatetics, Academics, and Epicureans, are called heresies of this one or that one. It is superfluous to go into detail and to list Marcion, Valentinus, Apelles, Ebion, Montanus, and Manichaeus, together with their doctrines, since it is very easy for each one to find out for which errors these individuals are regarded. Would that Arius and Eunomius and the author of a new heresy were not so well known. Perhaps they would not have deceived so many! Therefore, “avoid a heretical man after one rebuke,” or as is expressed better in the Greek, νουθεσίαν. Now νουθεσίαν signifies more admonition and teaching without a rebuke. In the Latin copies (which, however, father Athanasius also approved) it is read, “After a first and second rebuke,” namely, because it may not be sufficient merely to correct him once, or to admonish one who is corrupted by some error, but even a second teaching would have to be administered to him, so that by the mouth of two and three witnesses every word may be established. [Cf. Mt 18.16]

But he gives the reasons why after the first and second rebuke he is to be avoided, when he says, “Because his sort are ruined and he sins, since he is self-condemned.” For one who has been rebuked once and twice, when his error has been heard, does not want to be corrected; he thinks the one who corrects him is in error. And instead he prepares himself to fight and wrangle over words. He wants to win over the one by whom he is being taught. For this reason, however, he is said to be “self-condemned.” For the fornicator, adulterer, murderer, and the other vices are expelled from the church by the priests. [Cf. 1 Cor 5.11–13; 6.9–10] But heretics pass judgment on themselves, by withdrawing from the church by their own choice. This withdrawal seems to be the condemnation of private conscience. I think that the difference between heresy and schism is that heresy contains perverse doctrine, schism separates from the church on account of episcopal dissension. To be sure this can be understood this way to some extent in the beginning. However that may be, no schism fails to concoct some heresy for itself, so that it may appear to have withdrawn from the church rightly.

Source: St. Jerome’s Commentaries on Galatians, Titus, and Philomen, translated by Thomas P. Scheck (Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 2010), pp. 344-346.