![]() | The contents of the Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church page were merged into List of heresies in the Catholic Church on 19 September 2020. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Heresy in Christianity was copied or moved into List of heresies in the Catholic Church with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This list needs a deep edition work:
-- Brighella11 ( talk) 23:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
A few others to ponder :
ADM ( talk) 04:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Great... thanks. I was thinking about whether Liberation theology was a heresy or not. Here's the problem that I'm having with this entire article. I think everyone can agree that Arianism was a heresy. It was declared to be such and so that's that. Some of the other theologies/ideologies that you mention may be heresies from your point of view or my point of view but how can we know who exactly considers it to be a heresy? By this I mean, has the Pope explicitly labeled liberation theology to be a heresy or has he just attacked it without labeling it a heresy. Is a Pope's opinion enough? I mean Arianism was anathematized by an ecumenical council. That's the Good Housekeeping Seal of heresy in any one's book. What do we do with heresies that haven't been declared as such by a council?
I have other problems with this article that I need help on. See below. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pseudo-Richard ( talk • contribs) 06:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
If we are to call Liberation Theology a heresy, we need to find a WP:RS that calls it that. And, in this particular context, we really need an authoritative source that speaks on behalf of the Catholic Church (which is why I am leery of using the pronouncement of just one bishop and would prefer a papal or conciliar pronouncement). -- Richard ( talk) 07:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
References
So far, I have stuck pretty closely to the original organizational scheme that was in place when this list was in the Christian heresy article. I think it is inadequate because the number of entries in some sections is pretty large. Also, the Gnostic and Christological sections overlap big time. Can anybody suggest ways to improve on this? -- Richard ( talk) 06:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
As I mentioned to ADM above, there's a problem because we don't use the word heresy as much these days and, with very few ecumenical councils, it's hard to draw a line and say "This is officially considered a heresy". The most obvious cases of this problem are Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses. Pretty obvious to me that these are considered heretical by the overwhelming majority of Christian denominations. But, are there reliables sources that say this? -- Richard ( talk) 06:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Arius was a heretic. Arianism is a heresy. Same with Montanus and Montanism. Hus/Hussites. These are clearly notable heresies.
But how about Henry of Lausanne and the "Henricians"? Arnold of Brescia and the "Arnoldists"? Where do we draw the line in considering a heresy to be worth including in this list?
Why do we not have Savonarola and Giordano Bruno in the list? Was Galileo a heretic?
Is the scope of this article just notable heresies or does it include notable heretics? I worry that, if we include all notable heretics, this article will explode in size.
I propose to remove Henry of Lausanne and Arnold of Brescia.
-- Richard ( talk) 06:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
The title of this article is List of Christian heresies. User:ADM has suggested a list of additions, some of which are heresies (e.g. Liberation Theology and Americanism) from the POV of the Catholic Church. The pre-Chalcedon heresies are pretty much considered heresies by all of Christianity. Protestantism is considered a heresy by the Catholic Church but obviously not by Protestants.
How do we inform the reader which of the entries in this article are considered heresies by only some churches?
-- Richard ( talk) 08:16, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I hesitated to add the section on the Reformation and include Protestantism as a heresy although it's clear that the Catholics and perhaps the Orthodox consider it to be a heresy.
Part of the hesitation is the concern that labelling Protestantism as a heresy would be considered POV by Protestants. Sorry, this isn't meant as a POV attack. It's simply true that the Catholics and Orthodox consider it a heresy. Their opinion, not mine.
Of course, Protestantism is one of the most widespread, widely accepted heresies. Even the Catholic Church doesn't really use "heresy" or "heretic" to refer to Protestantism these days.
Now my other concern with this section is the inclusion of Hyper-calvinism. Why just this one entry? In truth, all forms of Protestantism are heresies. Why not add Calvinism, Lutheranism, Presbyterianism, Baptist, Methodist? Well, that might be overkill as the section would grow long as we tried to add every kind of Protestantism under the sun (and there are many).
I would like to know what other editors think about these questions.
-- Richard ( talk) 17:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Certain modern Christians (mostly Baptists, see Landmark Baptist - for one) support a fanciful narritave that connects a series of ancient and mideveal people and sects in an to attempt to claim that any number of modern Christian sects have ancient histories that stretch back to the time of the apostles. It runs something along the lines of St Paul to Novationists to Donatists to Paulicianists to Claudius of Turin to Petrobucians to Henricians to Cathars to Waldenses to Wycliff and Huss to Anabaptists to Modern Baptists. That skips quite a bit, but you get the picture. It was pushed hard in the 19th century and it is pure fiction. It does not even stand up to even the slightest examination and the only pieces of "evidence" that ever backed it up whotsoever were found to be Victorian era forgeries. I cleared most of this nonsense out of Wikipedia quietly two years ago, but some editors, mostly IPs try to slip this back into the ecyclopedia from time to time. The Waldensian article is one of the few I monitor, as there are legit modern Waldensians and they have made it clear they do not support this belief about their sect's origin. I worry less about the Cathars, Paulicianists, etc. as they are confined to the history books. Please, any help to keep an eye out for this nonsense would be a good thing. -- Secisek (talk) 20:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps an additional column (or section within the fourth column could indicate WHo considers it heretical? eg Mainstream Nicean Christians, Catholics, Protestants, Calvinists etc. Xan dar 10:51, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Now, which of these listed denominations is the one and only true christianity to which we Lutherans, Calvinists, Catholics and Orthodox are heretics? Shouldn't the title of the article have "sects" instead of "heresies"? After all: God knows whome of us are right in what way. ... said: Rursus ( bork²) 10:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Rursus asks if this article is new. Yes, it is "new/old". I created it in January of this year by extracting text from Christian heresy which had been there for probably a couple of years before. This is the first revision of the article. I expanded the article by adding descriptions to many of the heresies and converting the list into a table format to better organize the expanded descriptions.
I am the primary author although much of the text has been cut-and-pasted from the articles on each heresy and other people have helped.
I'm open to adding, modifying or deleting information. Some of the points in the section titled "Heresy?" above are worth discussing. I don't have time right now but I'll try to get back to it soon.
-- Richard ( talk) 16:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I have cited the Protestantism section for lacking a NPOV. As I said in the edit summary, Protestantism is not a mere fringe movement in Christianity, and this page should not be used to peddle the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. More suitable for this sort of thing would be a short section discussing disagreements between current Christian sects and how this often leads to accusations of heresy. The list could include only historical or fringe movements in the history of Christianity. Merely adding a section citing the Roman Catholic Church would be silly. Zach82 ( talk) 22:47, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
The article seems to have been moved by User:Carlaude without any discussion. Now Carlaude may be bias since she/he is a Protestant heretic in religious disposition. The article title "heresies in Catholicism" negates the fact that the Orthodox consider these as heresies as well. The only people who don't are the so-called "Judeo-Christian" Protestants. - 90.212.77.135 ( talk) 20:13, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was Move to List of Christian heresies. This seems to be the least problematic option. Cúchullain t/ c 12:35, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
List of heresies in Catholicism → List of early Christian heresies – I believe the article would be both more in accord with NPOV and more useful to the encyclopedia if it were renamed to the above. John Carter ( talk) 19:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC) First, I believe that the existing article title is inherently POV, as it relates to only one Christian group with a long history. Many of these beliefs would be considered heretical by Orthodox as well. Does their opinion somehow matter less than that of Catholics? Also, I believe it is inherently POV to refer to these heresies as being "in Catholicism". "To Catholicism" might be more accurate, but I believe even that title would be inherently POV, unless similar lists of beliefs considered heretical by other Christian groups were also developed. This brings up the last point, the more recent extant groups. I think most reasonable editors would know that the Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons, who hold beliefs which are substantially different than Catholics, could be described as "heretics" by Catholics. But, that being the case, pretty much any group which is not Catholic could be included here, and such a list would be both unworkable and functionally usless. I believe that there is some slight hope for the article being both NPOV and useful, but that for it to be so it would probably need to have a title and apparent scope which is not itself obviously POV pushing (like the current article is for the Catholic POV), and also probably of broader use. The title I propose above I believe helps address these concerns regarding the neutrality and possible usefulness of this page. The groups to be listed would probably be limited to those which were found to be "unorthodox" or heretical by the major extant Christian groups, the Catholics, Orthodox, and probably Assyrians, prior to the Reformation era, when several different groups came into existence, and the word "heresy" became both more frequently used to describe others and, on that basis, less neutral and less informative. John Carter ( talk) 19:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Return to List of Christian heresies. We aren't going to be able to come up with a title that pleases everyone, but I think this is the best course. How do you deal with the Protestant issue? Expand or modify the "Official Condemnation" section to make clear who says Fooism is heretical. There's going to be too much overlap for separate denominational articles, not to mention the bulk of heresies occurring before the establishment of modern denominational lines. Let's face it—you can't call something heresy while maintaining NPOV except when you're saying "X labelled Y a heresy." So let's be clear about that and move to a more appropriately broad article name. -- BDD ( talk) 19:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
I think it could keep the title List of heresies in Catholicism, since it wouldn't be possible to maintain a NPOV when talking about heresies. A Circumcellion might complain, lol. But this entry needs lots of work in a deep edit using the policy you can't call something heresy while maintaining NPOV except when you're saying "X labelled Y a heresy." -- Brighella11 ( talk) 12:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Clearly the lead needs to be modified, because it doesn't fit with the article title any longer. How is it to be written? On what basis are the things on this page Christian heresies? carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 20:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
I have had a go at redoing the lead section. I have also started to restructure the listing. It is a rather conservative effort as the retention of the material in the Appendix shows. I felt that the information should not just disappear. What I have removed by commenting out are those positions where I suspect the R-C Church may well have had second thoughts after Vatican II. Jpacobb ( talk) 03:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
I think the article is now in a more-or-less reasonable condition in terms of the overall discussion as to its nature and purpose and I am going to do something else for a bit. There is a lot of detailed work still to be done on content & references, plus wikification Jpacobb ( talk) 21:30, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
The debate about POV seems to have died down and while no article is immune to accusations of POV, I consider the legitimate points made earlier have been dealt with and this template is now unnecessary. Unless someone objects I will remove it towards the end of this month (November 2012) Jpacobb ( talk) 00:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
The POV tag was inserted in May 2012, this page has been reworked since then and the POV debate seems to have died down. Having proposed its removal in November, in the absence of any objections and the lack of further discussion on this page, I am removing it. Jpacobb ( talk) 21:47, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
... f.ex.:
etc., etc.. Rursus dixit. ( mbork3!) 13:59, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
I removed this section under "Modern Heresies."
I've seen a lot of agenda driven edits on Wikipedia and some outright horrific information, but this has to take the cake. Did anyone happen to check the source for the "council?" First some of these more recent "heresies" on this page are debatable differences. But I won't get into that. That council/source was no authority, Protestant or Catholic. It was a straight up pro-Arab site, pro-Arab as in meaning to say Israel has no right to the land.
This is a page on *Christian* heresies. Christian meaning those who say they follow Jesus Christ, who is the promised Messiah and Redeemer coming through the Jewish people. Christians are those who believe Jesus is who he said he was, the Son of God come as Son of Man as the sole Savior of the world (Isaiah 43:11.) The Old Testament and the prophets testify to Jesus's coming (Luke 24:44.)
A heresy is defined as a belief that is contrary to accepted doctrine. If a Christian is a follower of Jesus Christ, and Jesus said to listen to the prophets (also in Rev 1:3 and Rev 22:6,), what those prophets say, who also testified to the coming of Christ cannot be considered a heresy.
The ingathering of the exiles is Scriptural.
Yes, the ingathering of the exiles is Scriptural. It is Orthodox, not a heresy.
As for the belief that the exiles must be regathered before Jesus returns, that is Scriptural as well. There are multiple Scriptures that indicate this, but I think the clearest picture is painted by Zechariah. Chapter 14 talks about the Lord himself coming to fight for Israel after Jerusalem is overrun. He does this in response to the Jewish people acknowledging him as Lord, corporately and in national repentance.
Jesus speaking to the religious leaders of Israel who repudiated and rejected him:
Ezekiel also prophesied that the Eastern Gate of Jerusalem would be blocked until the Lord came (Ezekiel 44:1-3.) Suleman thought that belief orthodox enough that he blocked the gate AND put a cemetery in front of it in order to somehow forestall the return of the Messiah.
Just a clue, death, a tombstone and the gates of hell didn't stop him last time . . . and a few bricks aren't going to keep him back the next. Cma01 ( talk) 03:57, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
How about merely listing the specifically theological controversies within Christendom? Then one could organize the hotly-debated theological controversies by type, with one or more 'Main Article' pages for each of the heated discussions. MaynardClark ( talk) 04:30, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
There are many missing. Alogianism (Denied the Gospel and Epistles of John as Scripture), Collyridianism (Worshipped Mary), the Judaizers (Taught you have to obey the Mosaic ceremonial law to be saved), the Nicolaitans (Possibly founded by the deacon Nicholas; Unknown beliefs, possibly antinomian and most likely proto-gnostic), Preterism (Hymenaeus and Philetus; Taught that the resurrection of believers had already happened), Johannitism (Taught John the Baptist was the messiah), Nonadorantism (Not worshipping Jesus), Calcagnoism (Taught by Francesco Calcagno, says Jesus was a homosexual), and quite a few others. The list is good, but incomplete. -- Awobbie73 ( talk) 01:49, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
There was an attempt to refute "hyper-grace" in the section on modern movements, but no accurate description of the supposed "error" was made. Mineben256 ( talk) 00:46, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Attempts at refutation of the "hyper-grace" movement were done using Protestant sources in a section about Catholic heresies, and it is also redundant because of the Antinomianism entry above it. Mineben256 ( talk) 00:49, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
I think the part about individualism is out of place. The standalone page on individualism doesn’t seem to actually mention religious objections much less a accusations of heresy nor is there any reference to indicate any pope or cardinal or any catholic theologian whatsoever has denounced individualism as a heresy.
A potential replacement maybe could be Sede Vacantism, specifically the society of Saint Pius X. I don’t think it has ever been called a ‘heresy’ not officially been deemed a schismatic group but there were excommunications and despite moves since the 2009 rescission of the excommunications from 1988 the church has stated their ordinations though valid, are suspended and the group remain canonically irregular: LordBurke ( talk) 19:57, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
I find most of the 20th century material problematic in this article for reasons I've laid out in part at WP:NPOVN: the title of this page I think is fine if you want to discuss early church heresies (read: pre-1058) and *possibly* those up to the Protestant Reformation. The issue with the title and the post-Reformation groups is that even if there is a subheading discussing groups labeled by the Catholic Church as heretical, with the title, it implies that the groups are found heretical in all of Christianity, even if this is not the intent. I think it would be fine to have an article on groups labeled heretical by the Catholic Church, but even then, we'd need to make sure it was reliably sourced and not written in a way to suggest that Wikipedia agrees with it. TonyBallioni ( talk) 03:55, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: consensus not to move the page as proposed, per the discussion below. Discussion about whether to split the article can continue as necessary and is not within the scope of this close. Dekimasu よ! 23:55, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
List of Christian heresies →
List of defunct Christian denominations – Per
WP:NPOV. See:
Category:Defunct Christian organizations.
Chicbyaccident (
talk)
14:15, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Most of the entries on this list have been condemned by other branches of Christendom. Most, in fact, were condemned long before the Catholic Church as such even existed. It should be changed back to better reflect the list's purpose: as it stands now, it gives the arrogant and flat-out wrong impression that the Catholic Church is the sole determiner of heresy. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 04:28, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Why not merge Catholic teachings on heresy and Outline of heresies in the Catholic Church here? Better keep it in one place. PPEMES ( talk) 12:43, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Catholic teachings on heresy which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 13:17, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Heresy in the Catholic Church which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 12:48, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
I have twice removed communism from this list. The text and sources indicated that communism was declared to be apostasy, not heresy. This page is "List of heresies...". Heresy and apostasy are not the same thing.-- Srleffler ( talk) 17:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Communism is not a heresy. Communism is a political system, not a theological position. While the Church rejects communism as it is incompatible with the Catholic faith, it is in itself not an heresy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2406:3003:2073:d74:4d7e:3f25:46b1:e4e4 ( talk • contribs) 15:54, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
List of Christian heresies and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 22 § List of Christian heresies until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk)
07:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 23 § Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church until a consensus is reached.
Veverve (
talk)
12:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Outline of Heresies in Catholicism has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 23 § Outline of Heresies in Catholicism until a consensus is reached.
Veverve (
talk)
12:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Outline of heresies in the Catholic Church has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 23 § Outline of heresies in the Catholic Church until a consensus is reached.
Veverve (
talk)
12:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Should Maximón be listed? -- 94.255.152.53 ( talk) 07:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
![]() | The contents of the Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church page were merged into List of heresies in the Catholic Church on 19 September 2020. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Heresy in Christianity was copied or moved into List of heresies in the Catholic Church with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This list needs a deep edition work:
-- Brighella11 ( talk) 23:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
A few others to ponder :
ADM ( talk) 04:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Great... thanks. I was thinking about whether Liberation theology was a heresy or not. Here's the problem that I'm having with this entire article. I think everyone can agree that Arianism was a heresy. It was declared to be such and so that's that. Some of the other theologies/ideologies that you mention may be heresies from your point of view or my point of view but how can we know who exactly considers it to be a heresy? By this I mean, has the Pope explicitly labeled liberation theology to be a heresy or has he just attacked it without labeling it a heresy. Is a Pope's opinion enough? I mean Arianism was anathematized by an ecumenical council. That's the Good Housekeeping Seal of heresy in any one's book. What do we do with heresies that haven't been declared as such by a council?
I have other problems with this article that I need help on. See below. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pseudo-Richard ( talk • contribs) 06:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
If we are to call Liberation Theology a heresy, we need to find a WP:RS that calls it that. And, in this particular context, we really need an authoritative source that speaks on behalf of the Catholic Church (which is why I am leery of using the pronouncement of just one bishop and would prefer a papal or conciliar pronouncement). -- Richard ( talk) 07:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
References
So far, I have stuck pretty closely to the original organizational scheme that was in place when this list was in the Christian heresy article. I think it is inadequate because the number of entries in some sections is pretty large. Also, the Gnostic and Christological sections overlap big time. Can anybody suggest ways to improve on this? -- Richard ( talk) 06:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
As I mentioned to ADM above, there's a problem because we don't use the word heresy as much these days and, with very few ecumenical councils, it's hard to draw a line and say "This is officially considered a heresy". The most obvious cases of this problem are Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses. Pretty obvious to me that these are considered heretical by the overwhelming majority of Christian denominations. But, are there reliables sources that say this? -- Richard ( talk) 06:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Arius was a heretic. Arianism is a heresy. Same with Montanus and Montanism. Hus/Hussites. These are clearly notable heresies.
But how about Henry of Lausanne and the "Henricians"? Arnold of Brescia and the "Arnoldists"? Where do we draw the line in considering a heresy to be worth including in this list?
Why do we not have Savonarola and Giordano Bruno in the list? Was Galileo a heretic?
Is the scope of this article just notable heresies or does it include notable heretics? I worry that, if we include all notable heretics, this article will explode in size.
I propose to remove Henry of Lausanne and Arnold of Brescia.
-- Richard ( talk) 06:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
The title of this article is List of Christian heresies. User:ADM has suggested a list of additions, some of which are heresies (e.g. Liberation Theology and Americanism) from the POV of the Catholic Church. The pre-Chalcedon heresies are pretty much considered heresies by all of Christianity. Protestantism is considered a heresy by the Catholic Church but obviously not by Protestants.
How do we inform the reader which of the entries in this article are considered heresies by only some churches?
-- Richard ( talk) 08:16, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I hesitated to add the section on the Reformation and include Protestantism as a heresy although it's clear that the Catholics and perhaps the Orthodox consider it to be a heresy.
Part of the hesitation is the concern that labelling Protestantism as a heresy would be considered POV by Protestants. Sorry, this isn't meant as a POV attack. It's simply true that the Catholics and Orthodox consider it a heresy. Their opinion, not mine.
Of course, Protestantism is one of the most widespread, widely accepted heresies. Even the Catholic Church doesn't really use "heresy" or "heretic" to refer to Protestantism these days.
Now my other concern with this section is the inclusion of Hyper-calvinism. Why just this one entry? In truth, all forms of Protestantism are heresies. Why not add Calvinism, Lutheranism, Presbyterianism, Baptist, Methodist? Well, that might be overkill as the section would grow long as we tried to add every kind of Protestantism under the sun (and there are many).
I would like to know what other editors think about these questions.
-- Richard ( talk) 17:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Certain modern Christians (mostly Baptists, see Landmark Baptist - for one) support a fanciful narritave that connects a series of ancient and mideveal people and sects in an to attempt to claim that any number of modern Christian sects have ancient histories that stretch back to the time of the apostles. It runs something along the lines of St Paul to Novationists to Donatists to Paulicianists to Claudius of Turin to Petrobucians to Henricians to Cathars to Waldenses to Wycliff and Huss to Anabaptists to Modern Baptists. That skips quite a bit, but you get the picture. It was pushed hard in the 19th century and it is pure fiction. It does not even stand up to even the slightest examination and the only pieces of "evidence" that ever backed it up whotsoever were found to be Victorian era forgeries. I cleared most of this nonsense out of Wikipedia quietly two years ago, but some editors, mostly IPs try to slip this back into the ecyclopedia from time to time. The Waldensian article is one of the few I monitor, as there are legit modern Waldensians and they have made it clear they do not support this belief about their sect's origin. I worry less about the Cathars, Paulicianists, etc. as they are confined to the history books. Please, any help to keep an eye out for this nonsense would be a good thing. -- Secisek (talk) 20:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps an additional column (or section within the fourth column could indicate WHo considers it heretical? eg Mainstream Nicean Christians, Catholics, Protestants, Calvinists etc. Xan dar 10:51, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Now, which of these listed denominations is the one and only true christianity to which we Lutherans, Calvinists, Catholics and Orthodox are heretics? Shouldn't the title of the article have "sects" instead of "heresies"? After all: God knows whome of us are right in what way. ... said: Rursus ( bork²) 10:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Rursus asks if this article is new. Yes, it is "new/old". I created it in January of this year by extracting text from Christian heresy which had been there for probably a couple of years before. This is the first revision of the article. I expanded the article by adding descriptions to many of the heresies and converting the list into a table format to better organize the expanded descriptions.
I am the primary author although much of the text has been cut-and-pasted from the articles on each heresy and other people have helped.
I'm open to adding, modifying or deleting information. Some of the points in the section titled "Heresy?" above are worth discussing. I don't have time right now but I'll try to get back to it soon.
-- Richard ( talk) 16:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I have cited the Protestantism section for lacking a NPOV. As I said in the edit summary, Protestantism is not a mere fringe movement in Christianity, and this page should not be used to peddle the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. More suitable for this sort of thing would be a short section discussing disagreements between current Christian sects and how this often leads to accusations of heresy. The list could include only historical or fringe movements in the history of Christianity. Merely adding a section citing the Roman Catholic Church would be silly. Zach82 ( talk) 22:47, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
The article seems to have been moved by User:Carlaude without any discussion. Now Carlaude may be bias since she/he is a Protestant heretic in religious disposition. The article title "heresies in Catholicism" negates the fact that the Orthodox consider these as heresies as well. The only people who don't are the so-called "Judeo-Christian" Protestants. - 90.212.77.135 ( talk) 20:13, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was Move to List of Christian heresies. This seems to be the least problematic option. Cúchullain t/ c 12:35, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
List of heresies in Catholicism → List of early Christian heresies – I believe the article would be both more in accord with NPOV and more useful to the encyclopedia if it were renamed to the above. John Carter ( talk) 19:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC) First, I believe that the existing article title is inherently POV, as it relates to only one Christian group with a long history. Many of these beliefs would be considered heretical by Orthodox as well. Does their opinion somehow matter less than that of Catholics? Also, I believe it is inherently POV to refer to these heresies as being "in Catholicism". "To Catholicism" might be more accurate, but I believe even that title would be inherently POV, unless similar lists of beliefs considered heretical by other Christian groups were also developed. This brings up the last point, the more recent extant groups. I think most reasonable editors would know that the Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons, who hold beliefs which are substantially different than Catholics, could be described as "heretics" by Catholics. But, that being the case, pretty much any group which is not Catholic could be included here, and such a list would be both unworkable and functionally usless. I believe that there is some slight hope for the article being both NPOV and useful, but that for it to be so it would probably need to have a title and apparent scope which is not itself obviously POV pushing (like the current article is for the Catholic POV), and also probably of broader use. The title I propose above I believe helps address these concerns regarding the neutrality and possible usefulness of this page. The groups to be listed would probably be limited to those which were found to be "unorthodox" or heretical by the major extant Christian groups, the Catholics, Orthodox, and probably Assyrians, prior to the Reformation era, when several different groups came into existence, and the word "heresy" became both more frequently used to describe others and, on that basis, less neutral and less informative. John Carter ( talk) 19:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Return to List of Christian heresies. We aren't going to be able to come up with a title that pleases everyone, but I think this is the best course. How do you deal with the Protestant issue? Expand or modify the "Official Condemnation" section to make clear who says Fooism is heretical. There's going to be too much overlap for separate denominational articles, not to mention the bulk of heresies occurring before the establishment of modern denominational lines. Let's face it—you can't call something heresy while maintaining NPOV except when you're saying "X labelled Y a heresy." So let's be clear about that and move to a more appropriately broad article name. -- BDD ( talk) 19:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
I think it could keep the title List of heresies in Catholicism, since it wouldn't be possible to maintain a NPOV when talking about heresies. A Circumcellion might complain, lol. But this entry needs lots of work in a deep edit using the policy you can't call something heresy while maintaining NPOV except when you're saying "X labelled Y a heresy." -- Brighella11 ( talk) 12:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Clearly the lead needs to be modified, because it doesn't fit with the article title any longer. How is it to be written? On what basis are the things on this page Christian heresies? carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 20:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
I have had a go at redoing the lead section. I have also started to restructure the listing. It is a rather conservative effort as the retention of the material in the Appendix shows. I felt that the information should not just disappear. What I have removed by commenting out are those positions where I suspect the R-C Church may well have had second thoughts after Vatican II. Jpacobb ( talk) 03:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
I think the article is now in a more-or-less reasonable condition in terms of the overall discussion as to its nature and purpose and I am going to do something else for a bit. There is a lot of detailed work still to be done on content & references, plus wikification Jpacobb ( talk) 21:30, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
The debate about POV seems to have died down and while no article is immune to accusations of POV, I consider the legitimate points made earlier have been dealt with and this template is now unnecessary. Unless someone objects I will remove it towards the end of this month (November 2012) Jpacobb ( talk) 00:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
The POV tag was inserted in May 2012, this page has been reworked since then and the POV debate seems to have died down. Having proposed its removal in November, in the absence of any objections and the lack of further discussion on this page, I am removing it. Jpacobb ( talk) 21:47, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
... f.ex.:
etc., etc.. Rursus dixit. ( mbork3!) 13:59, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
I removed this section under "Modern Heresies."
I've seen a lot of agenda driven edits on Wikipedia and some outright horrific information, but this has to take the cake. Did anyone happen to check the source for the "council?" First some of these more recent "heresies" on this page are debatable differences. But I won't get into that. That council/source was no authority, Protestant or Catholic. It was a straight up pro-Arab site, pro-Arab as in meaning to say Israel has no right to the land.
This is a page on *Christian* heresies. Christian meaning those who say they follow Jesus Christ, who is the promised Messiah and Redeemer coming through the Jewish people. Christians are those who believe Jesus is who he said he was, the Son of God come as Son of Man as the sole Savior of the world (Isaiah 43:11.) The Old Testament and the prophets testify to Jesus's coming (Luke 24:44.)
A heresy is defined as a belief that is contrary to accepted doctrine. If a Christian is a follower of Jesus Christ, and Jesus said to listen to the prophets (also in Rev 1:3 and Rev 22:6,), what those prophets say, who also testified to the coming of Christ cannot be considered a heresy.
The ingathering of the exiles is Scriptural.
Yes, the ingathering of the exiles is Scriptural. It is Orthodox, not a heresy.
As for the belief that the exiles must be regathered before Jesus returns, that is Scriptural as well. There are multiple Scriptures that indicate this, but I think the clearest picture is painted by Zechariah. Chapter 14 talks about the Lord himself coming to fight for Israel after Jerusalem is overrun. He does this in response to the Jewish people acknowledging him as Lord, corporately and in national repentance.
Jesus speaking to the religious leaders of Israel who repudiated and rejected him:
Ezekiel also prophesied that the Eastern Gate of Jerusalem would be blocked until the Lord came (Ezekiel 44:1-3.) Suleman thought that belief orthodox enough that he blocked the gate AND put a cemetery in front of it in order to somehow forestall the return of the Messiah.
Just a clue, death, a tombstone and the gates of hell didn't stop him last time . . . and a few bricks aren't going to keep him back the next. Cma01 ( talk) 03:57, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
How about merely listing the specifically theological controversies within Christendom? Then one could organize the hotly-debated theological controversies by type, with one or more 'Main Article' pages for each of the heated discussions. MaynardClark ( talk) 04:30, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
There are many missing. Alogianism (Denied the Gospel and Epistles of John as Scripture), Collyridianism (Worshipped Mary), the Judaizers (Taught you have to obey the Mosaic ceremonial law to be saved), the Nicolaitans (Possibly founded by the deacon Nicholas; Unknown beliefs, possibly antinomian and most likely proto-gnostic), Preterism (Hymenaeus and Philetus; Taught that the resurrection of believers had already happened), Johannitism (Taught John the Baptist was the messiah), Nonadorantism (Not worshipping Jesus), Calcagnoism (Taught by Francesco Calcagno, says Jesus was a homosexual), and quite a few others. The list is good, but incomplete. -- Awobbie73 ( talk) 01:49, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
There was an attempt to refute "hyper-grace" in the section on modern movements, but no accurate description of the supposed "error" was made. Mineben256 ( talk) 00:46, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Attempts at refutation of the "hyper-grace" movement were done using Protestant sources in a section about Catholic heresies, and it is also redundant because of the Antinomianism entry above it. Mineben256 ( talk) 00:49, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
I think the part about individualism is out of place. The standalone page on individualism doesn’t seem to actually mention religious objections much less a accusations of heresy nor is there any reference to indicate any pope or cardinal or any catholic theologian whatsoever has denounced individualism as a heresy.
A potential replacement maybe could be Sede Vacantism, specifically the society of Saint Pius X. I don’t think it has ever been called a ‘heresy’ not officially been deemed a schismatic group but there were excommunications and despite moves since the 2009 rescission of the excommunications from 1988 the church has stated their ordinations though valid, are suspended and the group remain canonically irregular: LordBurke ( talk) 19:57, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
I find most of the 20th century material problematic in this article for reasons I've laid out in part at WP:NPOVN: the title of this page I think is fine if you want to discuss early church heresies (read: pre-1058) and *possibly* those up to the Protestant Reformation. The issue with the title and the post-Reformation groups is that even if there is a subheading discussing groups labeled by the Catholic Church as heretical, with the title, it implies that the groups are found heretical in all of Christianity, even if this is not the intent. I think it would be fine to have an article on groups labeled heretical by the Catholic Church, but even then, we'd need to make sure it was reliably sourced and not written in a way to suggest that Wikipedia agrees with it. TonyBallioni ( talk) 03:55, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: consensus not to move the page as proposed, per the discussion below. Discussion about whether to split the article can continue as necessary and is not within the scope of this close. Dekimasu よ! 23:55, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
List of Christian heresies →
List of defunct Christian denominations – Per
WP:NPOV. See:
Category:Defunct Christian organizations.
Chicbyaccident (
talk)
14:15, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Most of the entries on this list have been condemned by other branches of Christendom. Most, in fact, were condemned long before the Catholic Church as such even existed. It should be changed back to better reflect the list's purpose: as it stands now, it gives the arrogant and flat-out wrong impression that the Catholic Church is the sole determiner of heresy. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 04:28, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Why not merge Catholic teachings on heresy and Outline of heresies in the Catholic Church here? Better keep it in one place. PPEMES ( talk) 12:43, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Catholic teachings on heresy which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 13:17, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Heresy in the Catholic Church which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 12:48, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
I have twice removed communism from this list. The text and sources indicated that communism was declared to be apostasy, not heresy. This page is "List of heresies...". Heresy and apostasy are not the same thing.-- Srleffler ( talk) 17:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Communism is not a heresy. Communism is a political system, not a theological position. While the Church rejects communism as it is incompatible with the Catholic faith, it is in itself not an heresy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2406:3003:2073:d74:4d7e:3f25:46b1:e4e4 ( talk • contribs) 15:54, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
List of Christian heresies and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 22 § List of Christian heresies until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk)
07:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 23 § Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church until a consensus is reached.
Veverve (
talk)
12:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Outline of Heresies in Catholicism has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 23 § Outline of Heresies in Catholicism until a consensus is reached.
Veverve (
talk)
12:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Outline of heresies in the Catholic Church has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 23 § Outline of heresies in the Catholic Church until a consensus is reached.
Veverve (
talk)
12:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Should Maximón be listed? -- 94.255.152.53 ( talk) 07:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)