#16 | This Sounds Familiar: St. Epiphanius of Salamis

Introduction

This is another installment in the “This Sounds Familiar” mini-series about how the Church Fathers described heresy and heretics—and how their descriptions often matched what I took for granted as a protestant.

Today’s example comes from the 4th century bishop, St. Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 310/320-403). But before we examine his words, let us first recall the six characteristics of heresy and heretics articulated by the Church Fathers that I outlined in the first entry in this mini-series:

1. They separate from the Catholic Church, and deny its authority.
2. They interpret Scripture on a new and novel principle, and deny being bound by any Apostolic and ecclesial tradition.
3. Based on this novel principle, they concoct a new set of beliefs around which they form their own sect, which they erroneously claim is “Christian” and “the true faith.”
4. To justify their heresy, their primary tactic is to cite and quote Scripture as much as possible so that their new religion sounds “biblical.”
5. They were often named after the men who started them, or for a very particular doctrine they taught.
6. Their beliefs and definitions of their own heresies constantly shift and change, whereby the certainty and unity of Faith to which we are commanded by the Apostles is subjected to endless argumentation.

Roadmap

With that in mind, our Roadmap is as follows:

• Our thesis is that St. Epiphanius of Salamis’s Letter 51 (as numbered in St. Jerome’s letters) describes heresy and heretics in a way that “sounds familiar” to both today, particularly protestantism. We will show this by:
• Providing some brief historical context on St. Epiphanius of Salamis; then
• Quoting and examining Letter 51; then
• Summarizing the conclusions we believe can be reached.

Historical Context

St. Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 310/320-403) was a great 4th century Church Father who is most famous for defending the Catholic Faith against numerous heresies. He was ordained the bishop of Salamis in Cyprus in the 360s. His most famous work was written around 375 and called the Panarion, meaning “bread basket.” In it, he refuted the teachings of 80 heretical sects and/or philosophies from the time of Adam to his own. He was present at the Synod of Antioch (376) and the Council of Rome (382), at which he supported the claims of Paulinus II to the See of Antioch (alongside the Roman Church). He died in 403 on a journey back home to Salamis.

St. Epiphanius on Heresy

Let us now proceed to Letter 51, in which we can discern all six traits of heresy/heretics in one letter written in 394 by St. Epiphanius to John, Bishop of Jerusalem, in which he warns him about the dangers of various heresies, especially that of Origen (§§4, 6):

(§4) …If this doctrine is true what becomes of our faith? Where is the preaching of the resurrection? Where is the teaching of the apostles, which lasts on to this day in the churches of Christ?…

There can be no doubt that the meaning of the divine Scripture is different from the interpretation by which he [a heretic] unfairly wrests it to the support of his own heresy.

This way of acting is common to the Manichaeans, the Gnostics, the Ebionites, the Marcionites, and all the votaries of the other eighty heresies, all of whom draw their proofs from the pure well of the Scriptures, not, however, interpreting it in the sense in which it is written, but trying to make the simple language of the Church’s writers accord with their own wishes…

(§6) …But may God free you, my brother, and the holy people of Christ which is entrusted to you, and all the brothers who are with you, and especially the presbyter [priest] Rufinus, from the heresy of Origen, and other heresies, and from the perdition to which they lead. For, if for one word or for two opposed to the faith many heresies have been rejected by the Church, how much more shall he be held a heretic who has contrived such perverse interpretations and such mischievous doctrines to destroy the faith, and has in fact declared himself the enemy of the Church!

In these few words from just one letter, St. Epiphanius touches on each of the six traits of heresy outlined above, all of which I took for granted as a protestant, and protestantism relies on for its legitimacy.

1. Each of the heresies he described separated from the Catholic Church, and rejected its authoritative definitions of the faith.
2. He appeals to the continuous teaching of the faith since the days of the Apostles, and points out that the heretics proffer novel teaching that had never been heard before. He also emphasizes that heresy is heresy precisely because it contradicts the teaching of the Church, which has been faithfully transmitted, he says, since the time of the Apostles.
3. He notes that it is the heretics’ novel beliefs that lead to their misinterpretation of Scripture.
4. He observes that heretics constantly quote Scripture to make their heresy seem “biblical” and “Christian.”
5. All of the heresies he mentions were named after the individual men who founded them, whether Origenism, Arianism, Manichaeism, etc., or after a very particular doctrine they taught. “Gnosticism” was a basket of heresies, many of which were individually named after their founders. Recall that he is not explicitly naming most of the heresies he has in mind, but refers to them as part of “the other eighty heresies,” which he writes about in more detail in the aforementioned work, the Panarion.
6. Given that each of these individual heresies share all the above-mentioned traits, none of them arrives at firm conclusions about the Faith, but constantly shift and change their essential shape, which the one true Faith cannot do, given that it was revealed by God Himself.

Conclusion

In short, like many other Church Fathers, St. Epiphanius described the same six traits of heresy and heretics that I took for granted as a protestant. Perhaps most disturbing to me as a former protestant was the Church Fathers pointing out this very consistent pattern: heretics constantly citing and quoting Scripture, and pitting it against the Church in order to justify their doctrines and schism (and as a result endlessly dividing among themselves as well). “But,” I was told, “this is what good Christians ought to do, particularly when the Church is in error!” So I thought most of my life–and so have heretics always thought, no matter how far back into the ancient mists of Church history you go.

This does not mean that the Church should not explain Her doctrines from Scripture–She should, and has, for 2,000 years. But as I saw in this letter of St. Epiphanius, and in the writings of many other Church Fathers, they did not believe the Catholic Church would ever teach error. On the contrary, they believed its formal teaching would always accord with Scripture, given Christ’s promise to guide the Church into all truth until the end of time. Nor did this eliminate the possibility that errant bishops and priests–sometimes a great many of them–would arise and deceive many. Many Fathers had to deal with such wolves throughout their lives–indeed, that’s precisely what St. Epiphanius spent so much of his own career doing–and indeed, many founders of heresies were priests themselves. But this fact did not lead St. Epiphanius or other Church Fathers to the conclusion that the Catholic Church Herself would fall into error.

It is important to emphasize another pattern we see in this letter from St. Epiphanius, as well as in the writings of other Church Fathers, namely, that there is “the Church,” and “heresies,” and the heresies always contradict the teaching (singular) of the Church (singular). Indeed, St. Epiphanius notes in this very letter that all the multitude of heresies “have been rejected by the Church.” This necessarily assumes that the Church possesses authority to not only refute the heresies, but to articulate its own doctrine, which is the only one fully revealed by God.

This framework of thought is everywhere present in the Fathers, who were more than acquainted with many sects claiming the name of “Christian” and splitting off from the one true Church. This is not a new phenomenon, or one that began after 1517, or 1054. It has been a constant in the life of the Church–a “one niner,” as I call it (referring to “nothing new under the sun” in Ecclesiastes 1:9).

As disturbing as this discovery was at first, it was eventually liberating to realize that the Church’s experience had been so broadly consistent across so many ages. Confronted by countless heresies and schisms from the beginning She had been; overcome, She was not!