Heretic controversy

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The heretics controversy of the 3rd and 4th centuries was a theological argument about the validity of Christian baptism .

initial situation

By the middle of the 3rd century, two different approaches had developed in early Christianity to deal with Christians who had received baptism in a community ( heretics ) separate from the main church and who later wanted to join the main church:

  • Particularly in North Africa, but also in parts of Asia Minor, a subjective understanding of the sacraments dominated : the validity of baptism was made dependent on the personal worthiness and orthodoxy of the baptismal giver, therefore the validity of the baptism donated by heretics was rejected and when they were accepted into the church they were rebaptized required. Heretical clerics who do not possess the Holy Spirit cannot communicate it to the baptized person either.
  • On the other hand, an objective understanding of the sacraments prevailed, especially in Rome: Baptism received in the right way ( trinitarian baptismal formula ) and right intention is always valid, regardless of the person of the baptismal giver. The heretic who converted to the main church was treated like a penitent and received by the laying on of hands.

Aggravation in the middle of the 3rd century

As early as 220 AD, a provincial council in Carthage under Bishop Agrippinus had rejected the validity of baptism in heretics. Tertullian's understanding of baptism was followed. This remained unchallenged for about 30 years, but when decisions 255 and 256 were confirmed by the Synods of Iconium and Synnada, a conflict arose. The background to this was the persecution of Christians under Emperor Decius (250/51), in which many Christian clerics had fallen away for a time; these lapsi and traditores were now viewed by many others as heretics. Because of their lack of steadfastness, the sacraments they donate are ineffective - even retrospectively.

The Roman bishop Stephan I rejected the decisions of Iconium and Synnada, as soon as he learned about them, in sharp form. He even forbade the Roman Christians to receive hospitably the North African delegation that brought the council resolutions. This in turn led to sharp backlash from the Bishop of Carthage, Cyprian of Carthage . Cyprian, who escaped the Decian persecution himself by fleeing, was therefore criticized and therefore could not possibly lose face to his community, argued above all with the unity of the church: There is only one church, only one faith, only one Holy Spirit - and therefore only a baptism that is validly donated only within the community associated with the legitimate and worthy bishop.

“For we believe and believe it is certain that no one outside, outside the church, can be baptized, since only one baptism is instituted in the holy church. ... Or how can the baptized person grant the forgiveness of sins to another if he himself stands outside the church and (therefore) cannot get rid of his own sins? "

- Cyprian of Carthage: Letter 70.1

Cyprian received support from Firmilian , the bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia (ep. 75 in Cyprian's letters); this in turn was excommunicated by Stephan I. Stephan I tried to enforce his position by invoking that, as the successor of Peter, he exercised an authority over all other churches, which he did with the Bible verse Mt 16: 18f. reasoned. "He received energetic opposition from various particular churches, nowhere was his idea recognized," said Norbert Brox .

The martyrdom of the bishops Cyprian and Sixtus (Xystus) II , the successor of Stephen, in the Valerian persecution 258 preceded a rift between the North African and Roman Churches, which were already competing for priority in Latin Christianity.

Theological clarification of the dispute

The heretic controversy between the North Africans and the Church of Rome flared up again after the end of the Diocletian persecution of Christians and, from the point of view of most bishops, was settled by the Synod of Arles (314 AD), which recognized the validity of heretic baptism, but the right-wing ones Belief in the Trinity of the heretics demanded as a prerequisite. The heretics controversy found a continuation from 313 onwards in the decades-long dispute between the Donatists and the Catholic Church. Based on the North African theological tradition, the Donatists advocated an extreme sacramental subjectivism and argued that even a bishop who was ordained by a traditor was not a legitimate cleric. This time the dispute, in which Constantine the Great also intervened, actually led to a schism that lasted into the fifth century. The dispute between the Doctor of the Church Augustine and the Donatists also represents a decisive theological clarification of the heretic controversy from the point of view of the majority Church .

The IV Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Trent followed this line and reaffirmed the validity of baptism, which is given with the right baptismal formula, with the right matter (water) and with the right intention, regardless of the person of the donor.

In addition to clarifying the theology of the sacraments, the heresy controversy also has a considerable impact on the understanding of the church, ecclesiology . The positions that Cyprian of Carthage developed with regard to the unity of the church in the heretic controversy became influential in later theological history, while his position regarding the validity of the baptism of heretics could not prevail.

literature

  • Maurice Bévenot: Cyprian's platform in the rebaptism controversy. In: HeyJ 19 (1978), pp. 123-142.
  • Francine Cardman: Cyprian and Rome. The baptism dispute. in: Conc (D) 18 (1982), pp. 553-558.
  • Josef A. Fischer: The council of Carthage in autumn 254. In: ZKG 93 (1982), pp. 223-239.
  • Josef A. Fischer: The Council of Carthage in the year 255. In: AHC 14 (1982), pp. 227-240.
  • Josef A. Fischer: The Council of Carthage in the spring of 256. In: AHC 15 (1983), pp. 1–14.
  • Josef A. Fischer: The Council of Carthage in late summer 256. In: AHC 16 (1984), pp. 1–39.
  • Stuart George Hall: Stephen I of Rome and the Baptismal Controversy of 256. In: BRHE 8 (1987), pp. 78-82.
  • Hubert Kirchner: The heretic controversy between Carthage and Rome and its consequences for the question of the limits of the church. In: ZKG 81 (1970), pp. 290-307.
  • J. Jayakiran Sebastian: "... baptisma unum in sancta ecclesia." A Theological Appraisal of the Baptismal Controversy in the Work and Writings of Cyprian of Carthage. Ammersbek near Hamburg 1997.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c d e f Wilhelm M. Gessel: Ketzertaufstreit . In: Walter Kasper (Ed.): Lexicon for Theology and Church . 3. Edition. tape 5 . Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau 1996, Sp. 1417 .
  2. ^ Norbert Brox : Kirchengeschichte des Altertums , Patmos, 6th edition Düsseldorf 1998, p. 141.
  3. ^ Norbert Brox: Church history of antiquity , Patmos, 6th edition Düsseldorf 1998, p. 141f.
  4. ^ Adolf Martin Ritter : Church and theology history in sources , Neukirchener Verlag, 4th edition Neukirchen 1989, p. 98.
  5. ↑ Quoted here from: Adolf Martin Ritter : Kirchen- und Theologiegeschichte in Quellen , Neukirchener Verlag, 4th edition Neukirchen 1989, p. 95.
  6. ^ Norbert Brox: Church history of antiquity , Patmos, 6th edition Düsseldorf 1998, p. 107.
  7. ^ Norbert Brox : Kirchengeschichte des Altertums , Patmos, 6th edition Düsseldorf 1998, pp. 70–72.
  8. ↑ Wilhelm M. Gessel: Heretic disputes . In: Walter Kasper (Ed.): Lexicon for Theology and Church . 3. Edition. tape 5 . Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau 1996, Sp. 1418 .