Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 1 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Question 1
David Bercot insists it’s “absurd” to call the Church of the East “Nestorian” and notes that Nestorius “was not even a member of their church”; what does the West’s power to name (and misname) other Christians reveal about how authority and “orthodoxy” were functioning after Constantine?
Another way to ask: If the Church of the East wasn’t even Nestorius’s church, what does the West’s ability to label other Christians show about who had power to define “orthodoxy” after Constantine?

Direct Answer Based on David Bercot’s teaching, the West’s ability to stick a false label on the Church of the East shows that “orthodoxy” after Constantine functioned through political and institutional power—not just truth, love, or apostolic faith.

Support from Transcript:

  • Bercot says it is “a bit absurd to even call these people Nestorians,” because “Nestorius was not even a member of their church,” and their history begins “about 400 years before Nestorius.”
  • He explains they call themselves the “Church of the East,” but “because so many history books refer to these people as the Nestorians,” the misnomer stuck in the West.
  • After Ephesus, the Persian bishops declared they would manage their own affairs “independent of both Constantinople and Rome and Antioch,” but “because they had supported Nestorius on the issue of Mary, the Pope then labeled them as Nestorians.”
  • He notes Western Christians then “refus[ed] to even acknowledge them as Christian brethren.”
  • He portrays the Western church scene as “extremely political,” with emperors deciding bishops and rival seats jockeying for power.
Discussion Follow-ups How might labels today (liberal, heretic, cult, etc.) function more like power tools than careful descriptions? What safeguards could keep the church from confusing dominance with truth?