In this dissertation, I will examine all matters related to the efforts of the Fathers who have preserved the orthodox faith and who have helped build the church, which is the body of Christ. By examining the issues on heresy, I aim to overcome this problem of difference and wrongness, and further, would like to suggest a solution to cope with this problem found in the history of Christianity, which has been disguised as schism.
In this dissertation, I use Panarion(πανα??ριον) as the main text, which is the work of Epiphanius of Salamis, that summarizes the heresies in the early church. In particular, I developed this paper’s argument based on Panarion’s 64th chapter, which describes Origen and Origenist who were regarded as coming from the truth to a lie by Epiphanius. This is because, up to this day, there are various opinions on whether Origen was indi- vidually guilty or not according to scholars.
Even during the early church days, the evaluation of the early church fathers on Origen varied. In the controversy of Origen in the 3rd to 5th century, Eustathius of Antioch, who was part of the First Council of Nicaea, followed by Marcellus of Ancyra, etc., pointed out that Origen was the main instigator of Arianism. On the other hand, Athanasius of Alexandria argues against Origen’s views on souls and sin, but that he could not destroy his respect for Origen’s piety. He even asserted that Origen’s doctrines were far from Arianism, and rather it is inharmony with the orthodox doctrines.
In the first half of the 6th century, there was a new debate about Origen’s orthodox faith with the absolute influence of Evagrius Ponticus on Palestinian monks. In 543, Justinian I promulgated an edict excommuni- cating Origen and prohibiting the publication of Origen’s writings and doctrines, especially the nine propositions that appear on First Principles
(Περ? ?ρχων). After that, Origen was anathematized once again just before the Second Council of Constantinople in 553, together with Didymus the Blind and Evagrius Ponticus.
Ultimately, the problem of orthodoxy and heresy is a matter of truth. That is why the church has been keeping and protecting the truth while arguing extremely hard. In this respect, the inheritance of orthodox faith must be emphasized in order to solve the problem of heresy which is still being raised today.
What the heretical leaders that appear in Panarion have in common is that they were orthodox leaders before they became founders of heresies, and that they were important leaders or influential leaders in the church. This does not necessarily mean that the leaders of heresy were born in this sense, but rather that they became corrupted due to someone or something in their lifetime.
Therefore, the way to cope with heresy today is to achieve the universality of the church that is being taught in the Bible with a sense of responsibility and through the restoration of the confession of faith. Besides this, we must also recognize and practice the diversity of reality through our freedom that comes from the Christian’s conscience, and that we have the freedom from the disciplines that distort Christian teaching.
In addition, as a way of dealing with heresies, churches with different traditions based on the Bible’s teaching should have the capacity to renew themselves, to be more faithful to the Bible, and to have broad-mindedness to accept their diversity.
Lastly, the way to cope with heresy is to be aware of and recover from the reality of man’s power of reason outside Biblical grounds, or the fact that theology, which has been changed through history and that merely resides in the academic field, is negatively affecting ministerial fields and is not producing life. To do this, a new movement is desperately needed to fulfill the role of the priming water in reviving theology having become speculative.
I would like to make it clear that the solution to the problem of heresy in the divisive history of Christianity is to open the gates for an in-depth discussion of the problems of difference and wrongness.