And even the first historic church councils were gathered in order to resolve differences and squelch heresies like Arianism. Arius led a large and influential faction, as did Marcion before him. And we know that the early church fathers disagreed on many things; there were always factions. It's an old story, one which should keep us humble, especially those of us who prefer one tradition over the others. You and I have our favorite factions as well!

We don't have to get far in time from the Apostles to see the growth of widely differing emphases among those who claimed to be the true Church. Too many churches and denominations have sought to elevate their own biased perspective and traditions to rival the authority of Holy Writ. Or they have endeavored to pick and choose some scripture passages over the rest... to the point of imbalance. Even the names of denominations suggest how they lean toward a particular perspective. whether seeking to elevate England and its language (Anglicanism), or Martin Luther's reformed ideas (Lutheranism), or John Wesley's method of spiritual formation and ecclesiology (Methodism), or the Roman culture's sacramental and clerical emphasis (Roman Catholicism).

Many Christian traditions differ only because the human originators of the tradition subordinated some biblical truths to others. For example, Luther emphasized universal sin, bondage of the will, as well as salvation by faith (vs. works); Calvin emphasized the sovereignty of God, grace, and predestination; Rome emphasized clericalism and sacramentalism. For good or ill, they all represent forms of factionalism.

Although factionalism in the churches may be inevitable in this fallen world, theological and ecclesiastic balance should be promoted to minimize its negative effects. For students who are interested, I suggest a study of Romans 14 to reveal the type of issues which Paul considered to be secondary and not worth fighting about.

The Upside of Factionalism

Paul also saw some positive value to factionalism when it came to essential issues: "There must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized" (1 Cor 11:19). And it is obvious that if these factions reveal the true orthodox believers, they also reveal the heretics and unbelievers... and show congregations where and how the 'powers and principalities' are working in their midst.

The scriptures teach that believers in Christ are to "contend" for the original Apostolic faith (Jude 1:3) and to not be "unequally yoked" with unbelievers (2 Cor 6:14-17). We are to "come out from among them." It is clear that God sometimes wills schism to separate believers from unbelievers. https://www.virtueonline.org/schism-and-sword-spirit-bruce-atkinson

Essentials and Non-essentials

So what exactly constitutes unbelief in the churches? What constitutes heresy?

The most analytical and discerning way to understand this issue is to step back and see it abstractly from a distance, to see the forest before examining the trees. I ask that you recall the ancient motto about the ideal universal Church: "Unity in essentials, liberty in nonessentials, and love in all things." Of course, this saying absolutely begs the question of which theological beliefs and practices are essential and which ones are not. Where do we draw the line between adiaphora (indifferent things) and heresy or teaching "another gospel" (which Paul condemned in Gal:6-9 and 2 Cor 11:4)? And which issues involve mere differences in interpretation that do not affect anyone's salvation?

Who can argue against the Christian tradition that teaches that it must be Holy Scripture (2 Tim 3:16, Heb 4:12) which defines for us both the acceptable differences of opinion (per Romans 14) and also those terribly dangerous differences which constitute "another gospel" which can put our salvation at risk.

Over time, I have become convinced of the following three criteria which can help Christians to discern and define these differences for our edification.

1. If the scriptures are clear and consistent (without any exceptions) in both Old and New Testaments about how we are to regard a doctrine or practice, then we must accept it as important enough to God that we cannot invent any of our own exceptions.

2. If the scriptures (especially the NT) actually condemn an action or belief,then we must fully accept it as important enough to God that we cannot invent any of our own exceptions. It is to be proscribed in our churches.

3. Moral issues are far more 'essential' to the faith than are organizational (ecclesiastic and polity) issues or our preferences regarding style of worship. Whatever is clearly defined as "sin" in the NT falls into the category of 'moral' and thus must be considered as essential elements of the faith (e.g., 1 Cor 6:9). These sins must be repented of and given up for the sake of one's salvation. Note Acts 15 where the Jewish cultural and ritual rules (regarding food, holy days, circumcision, etc.) were abrogated for Gentile Christians but not the moral rules (especially those regarding sexual morality).

Current Controversial Examples

Pansexualism:One clear example of a blatant heresy these days (according to all three criteria) is the acceptance in some churches of pansexuality (homosexual behavior and transgender deviations). The scriptures are clear and consistent that such things are sin in both OT and NT, and can keep one from the Kingdom of God (see Romans 1:26-27 and 1s Corinthians 6:9). See my scripture summary here: https://virtueonline.org/two-litmus-tests-christian-orthodoxy-moral-realm-culture-wars, where I also added abortion as an undeniable evil, with biblical proofs.

Women Having Authority Over Men in the Church:Is the role of women in the Church a secondary issue, or is it a primary issue that identifies heretical churches and leaders? Does believing in women's ordination identify a lack of faith and jeopardize one's salvation?

Personally, I think that the issue of women in leadership roles is not adiaphora (indifferent) because the scriptures are clear, with very few exceptions (like Deborah the temporary judge in the OT, and deaconesses in the NT). More to the point, Jesus chose none of His many women disciples to carry the burden of authority that marked the 12 Apostles, and the Holy Spirit chose none of these faithful women disciples to write the words which would become the New Testament. And of course, Paul partially explains why this is so in his first letter to Timothy.

However, I believe that this teaching (that women are not to have authority over men in the church) falls somewhere between the essentials of the faith and secondary doctrines ... because it is not a moral issue but one of church organization and administration. Although the issue remains controversial and will not be resolved anytime soon, the question is, should it be the cause of major church conflicts and divisions? Like it or not, these conflicts and schisms are happening.

The spread of both of these controversial practices (pansexuality and women's ordination) have become epidemic in mainline western churches. This may have occurred because the revisionists were clever enough to first attack traditional masculinity and patriarchy as depicted in the Bible. The male gender and the traditional family structure had to be weakened. The enemies of Christ in this world have known that churches made up of strong faithful men would never have allowed these departures from the traditional faith to happen.

Here is a current example of this (now common) conflict in the churches. Celebrated pastor Rick Warren has written a letter to the Southern Baptist Convention defending his use of women pastors. [ https://churchleaders.com/news/452264-a-call-for-votes-to-affirm-evangelism-by-saying-no-to-factionalism-rick-warren-pens-heartfelt-letter-to-sbc.html ] In this letter, Warren says "no" to factionalism but he seems to ignore the reality that he is the one who is creating a new faction in the traditionally conservative SBC. Here is a significant quote: "This is a vote to affirm our founding documents (SBC) which insist that our unity is to be based on giving total submission to Christ in our deeds and NOT based on mental submission to man-made creeds." Is Warren not being totally hypocritical with this statement?

The truth about the role of women in the Church must be based on the scriptures if the churches are to be in submission to Christ (who is "the Word of God Made Flesh"). And I must emphasize that the elevation of women to positions of power and authority in Christian churches is NOT scriptural but is based on merely "man-made creeds" -- in fact, it is based on liberal egalitarian politics.

If Warren cannot fully document where the Bible and early Church tradition stands on this issue (and he avoids this), and if he simply uses his own opinion and the values of our current western culture, then he is making his stand on sinking sand.

If the authority roles of women in his church do not threaten anyone's salvation, it does not mean that Warren is an apostate, but yet it is clear that Holy Writ does not substantiate his views either. He will have to deal with the Lord regarding his hypocrisy and his subtle attempts to disregard the clear teachings of the Word of God.

I cannot complete my perception of this issue without sharing an important insight. There is a deeper reason for women not being allowed to have ruling authority in the Church, a reason which greatly benefits them and reveals God's love for women in general. I suggest you read a recent article of mine which explains the teachings of Jesus regarding who will be greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven: https://virtueonline.org/who-greatest .

Bruce Atkinson is a practicing psychologist and Christian counselor in the Atlanta area. He earned a PhD in clinical psychology and MA in theology from Fuller Theological Seminary; he also received an MS in research psychology from Illinois State University and a BA from Beloit College, WI. He is a USAF Veteran (medic) who served in Vietnam. He is also a member of the Anglican Church in North America and is Moderator and a frequent contributor to VirtueOnline.org.