These errors continue

[E.C.]

I think the chief heresy (the right word for error inside the Church) of our time, one that is absolutely central in causing the divisions, and the greatest threat in the Church today (as far as heresies are concerned) is the one I outlined in the other thread on corrective baptism, which I am tempted to call neo-gnosticism, in which a person thinks they know better than the Church, in which their own personal vision of what is good, right, and true trumps patristic consensus. This results in people thinking all kinds of things to be compatible with Holy Tradition which in fact are not. The humility and readiness to accept correction is completely absent.

Sounds like what one priest I know would describe as "crypto-Calvinism"

 

[rusmeister]

Sounds like what one priest I know would describe as "crypto-Calvinism"

Well, there’s an obvious differences, in that if in Calvinism, the believer sees himself as part of an elect, an excessive emphasis on a choice made before he was born, in this one the believer believes that he knows better than the collective witness of Christians of the past, usually not in personal conscious pride, but in an idea of a living collective in the Church that agrees with him, and in an idea that Holy Tradition is continually changing, though he won’t say “change”, but rather “grow” - again, talking of a “living” Tradition as if maintaining what has been passed down is “dead Tradition” by comparison. It takes a true idea, that things like the Liturgy, prayers and hymns, and dogma (as clarification) have developed over time, and warps it into actual change of dogma and praxis. Thus, it becomes OK to think of women priests (“deaconnesses” merely being a dodge to pretend they are not ultimately aiming at female clergy at all levels), of blessing same-sex sexual relations, and all the rest. Regarding truth and love, they err on the side of love, thinking that affirming whatever people say or do is “loving”, “tolerant” and the rest, and dismiss the stern teachings and warnings of the past. Their compassion is false, masking an ultimate indifference. They “know better”, thanks to modern science, etc. That’s why I spoke of a form of gnosticism. To them, the fathers are benighted; that’s why they reject patristic consensus that runs against their particular views. They are their own ultimate authority, their own judge of what the Church is and teaches, over any Council, over any consensus.
So I’ll conditionally refer to this as neo-gnosticism. (They do seek to innovate, rather than preserve, after all)