On the term "heretic" in Orthodox Ecclesiastical Tradition

The word (term) heretics has two meanings in ecclesiastical tradition and teaching. First, those who have been condemned, and second, those who are to be condemned.

Concerning those who have been condemned, the 6th Holy Canon of the Second Ecumenical Council states as follows:

“…We call heretics both those formerly excommunicated by the Church, and those afterwards anathematized by us…”

Concerning those who are to be condemned, St. Nikodemos says the following:

“For this reason also George Scholarios, in his work Against Simony, says that a heretic is anyone who either directly or indirectly errs regarding any of the articles of the faith. And the civil laws say: A heretic is one who deviates even slightly from the correct faith, and he is subject to the laws concerning heretics. And Tarasios, in the first session of the Seventh Council, says: To sin in matters of dogma, whether in small things or great, is the same; for in both cases the law of God is transgressed. And Photius, writing to Nicholas of Rome: For indeed it is absolutely necessary to preserve all that is common to all, and especially those things concerning the faith. In which even a slight deviation is to sin a sin unto death. Heretics differ from unbelievers in that the former do not think rightly concerning the things of the Christians, whereas the latter entirely reject the Incarnation of the Word of God.” (Meletios, Ecclesiastical History, p. 71)

Additionally, it must be said that St. Nikodemos and the official interpreters refer to and understand the term (terms) “heretic” / “heretics” in the Sacred Canons also in reference to those who have not been deposed. St. Nikodemos:

– Regarding the 31st Apostolic Canon: “… without knowing him to be manifestly either a heretic or unjust…”

– Regarding the 33rd Apostolic Canon: “… And if they should be found to be of corrupt doctrine and heretics, he says, do not commune with them…”

– Regarding the 15th Canon of the First-Second Council: “… but if the said presidents are heretics and publicly preach their heresy…”

– John Zonaras on the 15th Canon of the First-Second Council: “… But if perchance the patriarch, or the metropolitan, or the bishop be a heretic, and such a one as openly preaches the heresy, and with uncovered head…”; and further below: “… but they shall even be deemed worthy of honor as Orthodox, for separating themselves from the communion of the heretics…”

– Theodore Balsamon on the 15th Canon of the First-Second Council: “… And the canon rightly says that those who separate themselves before condemnation from teachers of heretical doctrines, and who are truly and manifestly heretics, are to be praised…”

Furthermore, we also cite the following:

“…The opinion prevails that the word αιρετίζων [hairetízon, “one who professes heresy”] means one not yet condemned, and the word αιρετικός [hairetikós/heretic] one who has been condemned. The two words have no semantic difference.

‘During the synodal discussion, at the point where reference is made to the deceitful interventions and alterations of the texts by the iconoclasts, Patriarch Tarasios declares that “these were done by the so-called patriarchs Anastasios, Konstantinos, and Niketas, the heretics” (Act V, Lamberz 2, p. 578). All the above were the iconoclast successors of Patriarch Germanos on the patriarchal throne of Constantinople. Therefore, as heretics, the bishops are characterized already prior to synodal condemnation,’ (V. Touloumtzis, The ecclesiological framework and the prerequisites for the acceptance of heretics..., pp. 242–243).”

 

Greek source: https://apotixisi.blogspot.com/2025/03/blog-post_26.html