Below is a list of definitions of important terminology found within the appendix to the bylaws of the International Society for Heresy Studies (ISHS), available as both PDF and Word files for downloading.

Members of ISHS are strongly encouraged to utilize the comment box located on this page in order to express their personal views regarding terminology and definitions provided by the Society. We welcome definitions which might be considered nontraditional; in fact, our definitions remain open to modification or expansion as new information comes in.

Programmatic Statement: Our Society’s focus lies on what creates issues within religion – meaning anything which disrupts creedal stability or normative discourse of doctrine – rather than traditional religious studies issues such as T.S. Eliot, the Society does not subscribe to the notion that literature created in any religious culture inevitably supports its major doctrines.

On the contrary, The Society supports the belief that significant theologies are often developed at the intersection of heresy and orthodoxy; literature that explores questions of faith, doubt, or nonconformist conduct honestly could serve as a great means of conveying the truth.

Following are definitions of essential terminology approved by the International Society of Heterodox Studies Board with consideration given to feedback from its membership. Although dynamic phrases that have been redefined several times over time and evaluated on an on-going basis may continue to change and be evaluated over time, in the spirit of intellectual honesty and conceptual clarity the society has agreed upon these definitions while giving room for future changes or perspectives that differ from that of most. They include:

Instead of applauding or denouncing heresy, its usage should remain value neutral and serve as the focal point for critical examination and investigation. Heresies may take many forms and be understood in various ways such as deviation from religious orthodoxies such as Pelagianism, Gnosticism, Universalalism or Deism; subversive beliefs systems like Satanism; various nontraditional conceptions of deities; contemporary radical theologies that go beyond conventional theologies; intuitive nonconformist positions like misotheism or Neopaganism as well as any number of interpretations which constitute what heresy means to each reader.

Therefore, the term blasphemy should not be seen as hate speech directed against one group of believers or as an act that attracts criminal penalties; rather it refers to acts done intentionally with intent of insulting or offending one or more deities. Regarding free expression and its purpose, blasphemy must be considered in context of freedom of speech despite any offense it might cause to those who worship a specific god or goddess.

Blasphemy falls within the category of sacrificial giving because, like blasphemy, it involves emotional reactions that derogate things deemed worthy of devotion or are perceived to be sacred objects. Literature and art reveal both the noble nature of free expression while at the same time showing us some of its more contentious or disconcerting results.

* An unbelief perspective refers to any position which does not believe supernatural beings, spirits or gods exist. Antitheists who also hold unbelief views as well as believers who detest God (gods) fall under its purview as members of this Society; it must also be noted that unbelief should not be confused with hate towards religion and detest of its god(s).

Heresy, Blasphemy and Unbelief: The Society is deeply invested in understanding the connection between heresy, blasphemy, and unbelief, in part because they aim to sharpen conceptual differences surrounding religious nonconformisms.

Heresy often involves belief systems characterized by their degree of abstraction or complexity; believers that hold such views may be considered heretics.

Blasphemy on the other hand can often be described as an emotional, visceral and invective statement against religious subversion; an attack against divinity expressed both by believers and non-believers alike; it goes against doctrine of divinity and can come in either explicit or implicit forms. Disbelief encompasses many dimensions, spanning from peaceful secularism advocated by New Atheists to their forceful public arguments against religion that they advocate.

Each of these forms of criticism can be seen to be subversive of religious orthodoxy, critical of clergy power and unsettling of theological teaching in different ways – although from very disparate angles. According to research undertaken by The Society’s study this subversion, criticism, disruption was at its heart.