In theological circles we use the term orthodoxy to refer to essential propositions, dogma, teaching, etc. that are considered "right" or "correct" as opposed to those same statements that are heterodox which has become associated through time with "false teaching" or "untrue" statements about the faith. Looking at the word heterodox itself without the historical baggage associated with it, it literally means anything that is different from what is considered to be orthodox. In this sense, it is that which is outside of what is considered to be any set of core propositions. Creating or supporting any kind of statement of the faith that is considered "heterodox" is also to marginalize a different view of things.
Adhering to anything orthodox is a political statement, it is not merely following what one believes to be the proper interpretations and instructions contained in the faith for how to live a life. Because orthodoxy sets itself apart and sets self over other teaching, it is inherently exclusionary. However, because we are talking about people who inhabit these different kinds of ideas, when we marginalize something by calling it "heterodox" we are also marginalizing the people who are convicted that their different ways of believing and living a life of faith are valid and right.
The rub is that people and ideas, and knowledge and power, are never absolutely distinct. Every idea, every conviction, everything we say about our own understanding of faith is inherently political. If we exclude ideas that are different from our own, and if we set those ideas as those of lesser value than our own, we are excluding the people who trust in those different ideas and beliefs. This is why orthodoxy invites protest. Those who are marginalized in any social structure that allows freedom of expression are invited to protest and make their voices heard in order to get those in control of the orthodox tenets of the faith to change. Of course this is different in systems where there is a congealed power elite at the top who simply enforce correct thinking all the way down to the parishioner.
It is because of this political problem of orthodoxy and how the medieval church controlled it with political force that the Reformation occurred. When I was in seminary I noticed that we liked to look at the Reformation through a pretty theological lens. What we never really discussed was that it was a massive movement of political protest followed by the even more potent and horribly violent political Anabaptist protest. The Reformation largely replaced one political problem with another. This shows us that when orthodoxy fuses with power, it becomes oppressive and marginalizes those who are different.
Until we understand the political nature of orthodoxy, and in order to mitigate the effects of revolutionary actions from those who are marginalized, we will be in an anemic position to understand the nature of change and how it is largely an inevitable outcome of our social structures. Because orthodoxy excludes people as much as it excludes ideas, until we allow heterodoxy into the walls of our politics and our theology, protest is always around the corner demanding for the marginalized to be heard.
Related posts:
