Journals / AKRA Kültür Sanat ve Edebiyat Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 14 Sayı: 40

Theopolitical Construction: Authority, Relativism, and Limits in Christian Heresiology

Teopolitik Bir İnşa Olarak Heresi: Hristiyan Heresiyolojisinde Otorite, Görecelik ve Sınırlar

Servet Doğan(SAMSUN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-8835-6041
Pages
161–184
Publication Date
2026-09-20
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In conclusion, heresiology is a historical reflection of Christianity's constant effort to redefine its identity and protect its boundaries.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In the history of Christian thought , the concept of heresy (heresy) initially meant a neutral preference or philosophical school derived from the Greek verb haireomai (to choose), but with the institutionalization of the Church, it turned into a theopolitical tool that maintained dogmatic boundaries.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This article, in which a qualitative historical and conceptual analysis method is followed, examines the conceptual evolution of this concept from Antiquity to the modern age, and examines the distinction between orthodoxy and heresy not only theologically; it also reveals that it is a construction process intertwined with power relations, identity construction and boundary setting practices.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, heresiology is a historical reflection of Christianity's constant effort to redefine its identity and protect its boundaries.
🔬Design:İnceleme Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Dinler tarihi · Hristiyanlık · Ortodoksi

Abstract

In the history of Christian thought , the concept of heresy (heresy) initially meant a neutral preference or philosophical school derived from the Greek verb haireomai (to choose), but with the institutionalization of the Church, it turned into a theopolitical tool that maintained dogmatic boundaries. This article, in which a qualitative historical and conceptual analysis method is followed, examines the conceptual evolution of this concept from Antiquity to the modern age, and examines the distinction between orthodoxy and heresy not only theologically; it also reveals that it is a construction process intertwined with power relations, identity construction and boundary setting practices. Used in the context of both religious groups and heresy in the New Testament, hairesis took on a negative meaning during the time of the Church Fathers. Walter Bauer's paradigmatic analysis seriously challenged the traditional successio erroris narrative and suggested that early Christianity had a more pluralistic nature. According to Bauer, groups that were later declared heretics (Markionians, Gnostics) were the majority in many regions at the beginning. According to Bauer, orthodoxy, after gaining superiority over time, has retrospectively grounded its position through narratives of legitimacy, such as the line of apostles. The concept, which was seen as a neutral choice in the Ancient Period, became a means of violence with the Inquisition and state-sponsored punishments in the Middle Ages. Movements such as the Bogomils, Cathars, and Waldenses have been accused of being heretical for theological and political reasons. In the modern period, Pope Pius IX's Syllabus Errorum condemned liberalism and modernism, while Protestant heresiologists, described Catholicism, Unitarians, and liberal theology as heresy. In conclusion, heresiology is a historical reflection of Christianity's constant effort to redefine its identity and protect its boundaries. This study shows that the distinction between true doctrine and heresy is shaped by historical processes, the dynamics of institutional authority, and identity construction- ; - While orthodox traditions establish their own narratives, alternative interpretations are often considered within the heretic category.

Özet

Hristiyan düşünce tarihinde heresy (sapkınlık) kavramı, başlangıçta Yunanca haireomai (seçmek) fiilinden türeyen nötr bir tercih veya felsefi ekol anlamı taşırken, Kilise’nin kurumsallaşmasıyla birlikte dogmatik sınırları muhafaza eden teopolitik bir araca dönüşmüştür. Nitel bir tarihsel ve kavramsal analiz yönteminin izlendiği bu makale, bu kavramın Antik Dönem’den modern çağa uzanan kavramsal evrimini inceleyerek, ortodoksi-heresi ayrımının yalnızca teolojik değil; aynı zamanda iktidar ilişkileri, kimlik inşası ve sınır belirleme pratikleriyle iç içe geçmiş bir inşa süreci olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Yeni Ahit’te hem dini gruplar hem de sapkınlık bağlamında kullanılan hairesis, Kilise Babaları döneminde olumsuz bir anlam kazanmıştır. Walter Bauer'in paradigmatik analizi, geleneksel successio erroris anlatısını ciddi biçimde sorgulamış ve erken Hristiyanlığın daha çoğulcu bir yapıya sahip olduğunu ileri sürmüştü. Bauer’e göre birçok bölgede sonradan sapkın ilan edilen gruplar (Markioncular, Gnostikler) başlangıçta çoğunluktaydı. Bauer'e göre ortodoksi, zamanla üstünlük kazandıktan sonra havari silsilesi gibi meşruiyet anlatıları aracılığıyla kendi konumunu geriye dönük olarak temellendirmiştir. Antik Dönem’de tarafsız bir tercih olarak görülen kavram, Orta Çağ’da Engizisyon ve devlet destekli cezalarla şiddet aracı haline gelmiştir. Bogomiller, Katharlar, Valdocular gibi hareketler teolojik ve siyasi nedenlerle heretik olarak suçlanmıştır. Modern dönemde ise Papa IX. Pius’un Syllabus Errorum’u liberalizm ve modernizmi mahkûm ederken, Protestan heresiologlar Katolikliği, Üniteryenleri ve liberal teolojiyi sapkınlık olarak nitelendirmiştir. Sonuç olarak heresiyoloji Hristiyanlığın kimliğini sürekli yeniden tanımlama ve sınırlarını koruma çabasının tarihsel yansımasıdır. Bu çalışma, doğru öğreti ile sapkınlık arasındaki ayrımın tarihsel süreçler, kurumsal otorite ve kimlik inşası dinamikleri tarafından şekillendirildiğini göstermektedir. Ortodoks kabul edilen gelenekler kendi anlatılarını kurarken, alternatif yorumlar çoğu zaman heretik kategorisi içerisinde değerlendirilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Doğan, S. (2026). Theopolitical Construction: Authority, Relativism, and Limits in Christian Heresiology. AKRA Kültür Sanat ve Edebiyat Dergisi, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 40, 161–184. https://doi.org/10.31126/akrajournal.1939751

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (22)

  1. Arthur, J. (2000). Another gospel: A survey of cults and world religions. Jude Ministries. http://www.judeministries.org/downloads/cults.pdf
  2. Bauer, W. (1971). Orthodoxy and heresy in earliest Christianity (R. A. Kraft vd., Çev.; G. Strecker, Ed.). Fortress Press. (Özgün eser 1934'te yayımlanmıştır.)
  3. Belloc, H. (2017). The great heresies. Unavoce Canada. https://unavocecanada.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/05/THE-GREAT-HERESIES.pdf
  4. Branzei, D. (t.y.). Identita creştina in istorie. Emanuel Calvary Chapel. http://www.emanuelcalvarychapel.com/wpcontent/uploads/2011/12/Identitate-Crestina-in-Istorie-de-Daniel-Branzei.pdf
  5. Buşgut, H. (2024). Hristiyanlıkta heretik kavramının dönüşümü: Erken dönem ve reform bağlamında bir inceleme. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 57, 301-326.
  6. Cristiani, L. (t.y.). Breve storia delle eresie. [Çevrimiçi PDF]. Erişim adresi: https://www.gugliuzza.net/biblioteca/STORIA-DELLE-ERESIE.pdf
  7. Dierkens, A., & Morelli, A. (2002). « Sectes » et « hérésies », de l'Antiquité à nos jours. Editions de l'Université de Bruxelles.
  8. Jacobs, R. (t.y.). Häresie und Häretiker: Merkmale und Reaktion. Kolhesed. http://kolhesed.ru/download/kolhesed.de/2015/KH.38.pdf
  9. Janosik, D. (2015). John of Damascus on the Qur'an: Evidence for an 8th century canonization [Doktora tezi]. http://danieljanosik.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/John-of-Damascus-on-the-Quran.pdf
  10. jw.org. (n.d.) Charles Taze Russell Yehova’nın Şahitlerinin Kurucusu mu? | SSS. https://www.jw.org/tr/kutuphane/kitaplar/sss/charles-taze-russell/
  11. Khoo, J. (t.y.). Heresies ancient and modern. Far Eastern Bible College. http://www.febc.-edu.sg/assets/ pdfs/studyresource/Heresies.pdf
  12. Köstenberger, A. J. ve Kruger, M. J. (2010). The heresy of orthodoxy. Crossway. https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/assets/uploads/books/18483/The%20HERESY.pdf
  13. Le Boulluec, A. (1985). La notion d'hérésie dans la littérature grecque, IIe-IIIe siècles (2 Cilt). Études Augustiniennes.
  14. Liguori, A. M. (1857). The history of heresies. Printed by James Duffy.
  15. Martin, W. R. (1997). The kingdom of the cults (R. Zacharias, Ed.). Bethany House Publishers.
  16. Morales, E. A. M. (2007). Herejías modernas. Seminario Teológico Quákero.
  17. Pius IX. (1864). Syllabus of errors (Hatalar dizini) (Papal Encyclicals Online, Çev.). https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9syll.htm
  18. Sahas, D. J. (1972). John of Damascus on Islam: The "heresy of the Ishmaelites". E. J. Brill.
  19. Talbot, L. T. (1955). Introduction. W. C. Irvine (Ed.) içinde, Heresies exposed: A brief critical examination in the light of the Holy Scriptures of some of the prevailing heresies and false teachings of today (3. bs., ss. 3-5). Loizeaux Brothers.
  20. Theophanes Confessor. (1997). The chronicle of Theophanes Confessor: Byzantine and Near Eastern history AD 284-813 (C. Mango ve R. Scott, Çev.). Clarendon Press.
  21. Wilhelm, J. (1910). Heresy. The Catholic Encyclopedia (C. 7). Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07256b.htm
  22. Wilhite, D. E. (2015). The gospel according to heretics: Discovering orthodoxy through early christological conflicts. Baker Academics.