Nicolaitanes or Nicolaitans:

 


The Nicolaitanes or Nicolaitans were a group of people mentioned twice in the book of Revelation in the New Testament. According to this reference, they were known in the cities of Ephesus and Pergamos around A.D. 99. The church at Ephesus (Rev. 2:6) is commended for "hating the deeds of the Nicolaitanes," and the church of Pergamos is blamed for "having them who hold their doctrines" (15). There is no other first-hand evidence to give us certainty about the nature of this sect.

Several of the early church fathers, including Irenaeus, Epiphanius, and Theodoret mentioned this group. Irenaeus[1] discusses them but adds nothing to the Apocalypse except that "they lead lives of unrestrained indulgence." Tertullian refers to them, but apparently knows only what is found in St. John. Hippolytus based his narrative on Irenaeus, though he states that the deacon Nicholas was the author of the heresy and the sect (Philosph., VII, xxvi). Clement of Alexandria exonerates Nicholas, and attributes the doctrine of promiscuity, which the sect claimed to have derived from him, to a malicious distortion of words harmless in themselves. With the exception of the statement in Eusebius (H. E., III, xxix) that the sect was short-lived, none of the references in Epiphanius, Theodoret etc. deserve mention, as they are taken from Irenaeus.

The common statement, that the Nicolaitanes held the antinomian heresy of Corinth, seems not to have been proved. Another opinion, favoured by a number of authors, is that, because of the allegorical character of the Apocalypse, the reference to the Nicolaitans is merely a symbolic manner of reference.

The meaning of the name, "victors over the people" or "rulers over the world" suggests to some of these authors that the Nicolaitanes were among those who maintained that there must be a religious hierarchy to control the spiritual development of the common people; it is believed they were trying to set themselves up as priests in a two-class system – one that would give them absolute control over the laity (common people), who would be completely dependent upon them for all spiritual knowledge, guidance, and access to God.

Scofield, in his Notes on the Bible, following dispensationalist thought, suggests that the Seven Letters in Revelation foretell the various eras of Christian history, and that "Nicolaitans" "refers to the earliest form of the notion of a priestly order, or "clergy," which later divided an equal brotherhood into "priests" and "laity."" He would identify the emergence of this idea historically with the Constantinian church.

Barnes notes: "Vitringa supposes that the word is derived from νικος, victory, and λαος, people, and that thus it corresponds with the name Balaam, as meaning either lord of the people, or he destroyed the people; and that, as the same effect was produced by their doctrines as by those of Balaam, that the people were led to commit fornication and to join in idolatrous worship, they might be called Balaamites or Nicolaitanes--that is, corrupters of the people. But to this it may be replied,

(a) that it is far-fetched, and is adopted only to remove a difficulty;

(b) that there is every reason to suppose that the word here used refers to a class of people who bore that name, and who were well known in the two churches specified;

(c) that, in Rev 2:15 , they are expressly distinguished from those who held the doctrine of Balaam, Rev 2:14 --"So hast thou also (και) those that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes.""

Source: Wikipedia

****

Nicolaitans, a sect mentioned in the Apocalypse (ii,6,15) as existing in Ephesus, Pergamus, and other cities of Asia Minor, about the character and existence of which there is little certainty. Irenaeus (Adv. haer., I, xxvi, 3; III, xi, 1) discusses them but adds nothing to the Apocalypse except that "they lead lives of unrestrained indulgence." Tertullian refers to them, but apparently knows only what is found in St. John (De Praescrip. xxxiii; Adv. Marc., I, xxix; De Pud., xvii). Hippolytus based his narrative on Irenaeus, though he states that the deacon Nicholas was the author of the heresy and the sect (Philosph., VII, xxvi). Clement of Alexandria (Strom., III, iv) exonerates Nicholas, and attributes the doctrine of promiscuity, which the sect claimed to have derived from him, to a malicious distortion of words harmless in themselves. With the exception of the statement in Eusebius (H. E., III, xxix) that the sect was short-lived, none of the references in Epiphanius, Theodoret etc. deserve mention, as they are taken from Irenaeus. The common statement, that the Nicolaites held the antinomian heresy of Corinth, has not been proved. Another opinion, favoured by a number of authors, is that, because of the allegorical character of the Apocalypse, the reference to the Nicolaitans is merely a symbolic manner of reference, based on the identical meaning of the names, to the Bileamites or Balaamites (Revelation 2:14) who are mentioned just before them as professing

Source: Catholic Encyclopedia

****


 

Who were Nicolaitans?

Paul Lansley investigates the New Testament antecedents of the liberal establishment

Revelation 2.12 &15: ‘And to the Angel of the Church in Pergamon write, These things says He Who has the sharp two-edged sword: … You also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.’

We may wonder who were these ‘Nicolaitans’, and what was their doctrine which was so hateful? They sound like something that might be yodelled in the Swiss Alps. St John compares their teaching to that of Balaam (Numbers 22–24), who in Numbers 31.16 is said to have counseled Israelites to ‘bow down to Baal-Peor’, and presumably not to have discouraged them from committing ‘whoredom with the daughters of Moab’ (Numbers 25.1–3). So the offence of the Nicolaitans, which the Church of Ephesus is congratulated for hating (Revelation 2.6), is ‘to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication’ (Revelation 2.14).

Putting it into the context of the Graeco-Roman world of the first century AD, we can see fairly easily what was happening. Some of the early Christians, from Gentile backgrounds or from Jewish families assimilating into such a background, thought that it would help to spread the Gospel if they took an ‘ecumenical’ attitude towards pagan religious observance and were easy-going in matters of sexual morality. After all, ‘in this day and age’ everybody does it…

If the New Testament tells us no more about the Nicolaitans, some of the early Christian writers mention them: Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and St Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons (martyred c202). It is St Irenaeus who links them to a figure known to us in the Acts of the Apostles.

What became of the seven deacons?

We read in Acts of the Apostles that when the Twelve found themselves burdened by administrative problems among the Christian community in Jerusalem, they appointed seven helpers. These men all had Greek names, and are reckoned as the first members of the Order of Deacons in the Church of God.

All but one of the Seven Deacons are counted among the Saints. It seems that, as with the original Twelve Apostles, one betrayed his trust. Their names are listed in Acts 6.5. What is known or told about them afterwards is as follows.

St Stephen is the first-named, and of course incomparably the most famous. The story of his martyrdom is told at length in Acts: his effective ministry, his arrest and trial, with his speech before the Sanhedrin, and his death by stoning, witnessed and approved by Saul of Tarsus. As Protomartyr of the Church, he is commemorated on the day ‘good King Wenceslas looked out’, the Feast of Stephen, 26 December – but the Eastern Church has shifted him to 27 December.

St Philip also appears prominently in Acts. He is called also Philip the Evangelist, and spread the Gospel in Samaria (Acts 8.5–13), baptized the Ethiopian Eunuch, then after a further missionary tour settled at Caesarea (8.26–40). Later, St Paul was his guest, and Philip’s four daughters who prophesied are mentioned (21.8–9). One of them, St Hermione, is honoured as a martyr (on 4 September). Philip is said to have become Bishop of Tralles in Lydia. He is commemorated in the western Church on 6 June, and in the eastern on 11 October.

St Prochorus is not mentioned further in the New Testament. He is said to have become Bishop of Nicomedia, and to have died a martyr at Antioch. The west commemorates him on 9 April, the east on 28 July.

St Nicanor was from Cyprus. He returned there to preach the Gospel, and was tortured and executed in the reign of Vespasian. Commemorated in the west on 10 January; in the east on 28 July (with the other three) and on 28 December.

St Timon was martyred at Corinth. He is in the western calendar on 19 April, and in the eastern on 28 July.

St Parmenas was martyred at Philippi. The west commemorates him on 23 January, the east on 28 July.

Credible to the modern world

Nicholas of Antioch, like Judas Iscariot, is named last on the list. This seems to lend credibility to St Irenaeus’ assertion that he was the originator of the Nicolaitan heresy. Acts tells us that he was a proselyte; that is, a convert to Judaism, not a born Israelite. So his Gentile background may have predisposed him to try and bridge the gap between the Hebrew and Hellenistic cultures. Indeed, Christianity itself was doing that, having dispensed with the requirement that all male converts should be circumcised (Acts 15). But this set up a tension which persisted through the first five centuries of the Church. How far should the Christian Faith be adapted to the ways of contemporary thought? At the beginning of the fourth century Arius assimilated the ‘Logos’ of St John’s Gospel with the ‘Demiurge’ of the Neoplatonists. The great champions of orthodoxy had to fight to uphold biblical revelation as against contemporary ideas, but nevertheless to express it in contemporary terms. This was the achievement of the Ecumenical Councils.

But the same tension plagues the Church today, especially in the west. We may remember a certain very high office-holder in the Church of England arguing in Synod for a total innovation in Church Order on the grounds that we must do this ‘if we are to be credible to the modern world’. Nicholas of Antioch could not have put it better! Alas, in 1992 his view prevailed.

‘Remember therefore from whence you are fallen; and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come to you quickly, and will remove your candlestick out of its place, unless you repent.’ Revelation 2.5.

Paul Lansley is a retired priest in the Diocese of Chelmsford.

Note: Eusebius gives a different, and opposite account of the Nicolaitans, alleging them to be puritanical, treating ‘all physical desire with contempt’. But Irenaeus’ version is to be preferred, (a) because it squares with St John’s reference to Balaam and to ‘fornication’, and (b) because lrenaeus lived more than a century earlier than Eusebius, and was closer to the sources – through St Polycarp to St John himself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

share this page with a friend