Revelation 2:6Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Because of this, it is reduced to ruin. Their soul follows the call of bodily impulses more than the teaching of the apostolic man, and sinks into the mire of vice.

How does their life differ from the life of Sardanapalus, about whom it is written: abundant food, passions, and pleasures of love. All this luxury, alas, is now inaccessible. Now I am dust, once the glorious king of Nineveh.

But when we mentioned Nicholas earlier, we forgot one point. They say he had a beautiful wife.

Soon after the Lord's Ascension, when the Apostles accused him of jealousy, he brought her to them and said that anyone who wished could possess her.

They say that such conduct fully accorded with the principle: "One must abuse the flesh," paraxrhsasthai te sarki dei.

The members of this sect followed his words and, acting simply and without discernment, took up complete corruption.

Yet I know testimony that Nicholas himself had sexual relations with no one except his wife. His daughters lived to old age and remained virgins, and his sons were strangers to corruption.

In our case, his conduct is explained by his desire to show the Apostles, among whom he had been accused of jealousy, that passion for his wife did not rule him.

In this way he sought to teach how one should "abuse the flesh." I think he did not wish, like the Savior, to "serve two masters" (Mt 6:24), passion and God.

Eusebius of Caesarea and Bede the Venerable share Clement's opinion of the Nicolaitans. Yet other Christian authors accused Nicholas the deacon of having been the initiator of this heresy; see Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.26.3.

The Nicolaitans were people who called themselves Gnostics, that is, rational ones, while Christians called them Borborians, that is, marshy or miry ones. The founder of the Nicolaitans was Nicholas the deacon, a proselyte from Antioch.

They speculated much about wisdom and virtue. They thought one should be affable, courteous to all, and try to please others, even while dealing with pagans.

Why then, to please them, should one not eat things sacrificed to idols? Why be so strict regarding the female sex?

Nature herself, they said, by planting in us various inclinations and impulses, thereby imposed on us the law of enjoying their fruits, so long as strength and health allow.

Why, these unfortunate men cried, blinded by the marsh lights of natural reason, yet imagining themselves great minds, should sensuality not be counted a consequence of age?

Why not pardon this vice in youth, as though there were a lawful season for passions and disorders?

This false teaching is an abomination before the Lord. Whoever wishes to be a true Christian must deny himself even many permitted things, so that he may subdue his passions and become master over flesh and blood.

It remains for each of us to consider whether there are Nicolaitans even now, perhaps under another name. He must ask whether he himself loves these heretics or hates them, not them, of course, but their works.

For the more a Christian sees the falsehood of their belief, the more he must be contrite. He must have more love for his erring brothers and more zeal to draw them from the mire of errors.

He must do this more by the example of his life than by disputes and debates at numerous conferences.

That meant a violation of God's will (Num 36:6-9). So also the teaching of the Nicolaitans introduced corruption into Christianity and indifference toward the eating of things sacrificed to idols.

It robbed Christians of their purity and holiness, brought them to mixture with peoples who confessed a tribal religion, and destroyed their high calling to be the light and sanctification of all nations.

To those who overcome temptations and passions, the Lord promises to grant the eating of the fruit from the tree of life.

"But this thou hast, that thou hatest the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate" (Rev 2:6). The Nicolaitans were heretics of the apostolic age. They were a branch of the Gnostics, marked in practical life by corruption.

Besides St. John the Theologian, the Apostles Peter and Jude also rebuke the Nicolaitans for corruption (2 Pet 2:1 ff.; Jude 4).

"To him who overcomes I will give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God" (Rev 2:7). This tree in the heavenly paradise of God is the Lord Jesus Christ.

To eat the fruit of this tree is communion with the Godhead, or, what is the same, eternal blessedness. Eden's paradise with the tree of life (Gen 2:9; 3:22) served only as a type of the heavenly paradise (Lk 23:43).

They are depicted as the most shameless sectarians, who drew Christians into participation in pagan sacrifices to idols and into corruption. The first weak seeds of such error are already visible in the Church of Corinth.

They are indicated under the names of the chief representatives of the abomination of pagan impiety and idolatry among the people of God in the Old Testament.

Balaam, a prophet who came from paganism, acted from base and mercenary motives. Through the daughters of the Moabites and Midianites, he drew the Israelites into idolatry and corruption (Num 25; cf. Num 31:16).

The pagan Jezebel, wife of Ahab, slaughtered the prophets of Jehovah and introduced idolatry into Israel.

The immorality of the heretics was joined to some higher, artificially stirred inspiration. This is indicated by the name prophetess, and by their supposed vision of the depths of God, which the Seer of Mysteries calls the depths of Satan.

They undoubtedly taught that morality must be rejected in its whole scope, so that one might be its true master.

They also taught that one could give oneself over to every vice, since such things touch only the body and not the free spirit. They debase the spirit as little, they said, as mud debases pure gold.

Such dreadful moral principles cast shame and reproach upon the Christian name. In the second century they were actually preached by most of the Gnostics, especially the Nicolaitans.

According to Irenaeus, Epiphanius, and Jerome, Nicholas himself, the deposed deacon, was a pure antinomian.

According to Clement of Alexandria, however, he was a strict ascetic. He abstained from marital relations with his wife and required the mortification of the flesh, which his disciples understood in the sense of antinomian corruption.

In this latter case we may see confirmation of how easily an unnatural asceticism passes into complete immorality.

The relation of the Nicolaitans to Nicholas may have been entirely like that of the Simonians to Simon Magus, and that of the Corinthians to Cerinthus.

One cannot agree with Hengstenberg's allegorical understanding of this name, since he quite unlawfully disregards the historical testimonies.

He sees in the name Nicholas in the Apocalypse not a proper name, but a symbolic indication, the Greek translation of the name Balaam, which means "destroyer of the people."

But first, this translation is literally incorrect. Nicholas means "victor of the people," not "destroyer of the people."

Second, Rev 2:14-15 clearly distinguishes the Nicolaitans from the Balaamites, although their teaching and life are presented as similar to one another.

In support of his interpretation, Hengstenberg says that in the Apocalypse all names are merely symbolic. This is entirely unjust, because the writer's name, the designation of the Jews, and the names of the Churches must be understood in their proper sense.

Likewise Peter (2 Pet 2:15) and Jude (Jude 1:11) compare those whom they rebuke, or immoral Gnostics, with Balaam.

Εδωλοθυτα φαγείν: the eating of things sacrificed to idols later also remained a mark of the antinomian Gnostics.

These Nicolaitans formed a heretical sect already in apostolic times. It traced its origin to Nicholas, one of the first deacons in the Church of Jerusalem (Acts 6:5), who taught that the flesh must be παραχρήσθαι, that is, mortified.

But since this same word could also mean abuse, there appeared people who appealed to Nicholas's authority and gave themselves over to dissipation, in order thereby to extinguish their passions.

In Ephesus, as is clear from this passage of the Apocalypse, the Nicolaitans chiefly showed themselves from this latter, practical side. Consequently, they were especially dangerous for simple believers.

If these believers still regarded their actions with hatred, then one could hope that the call to first love would not be left unheeded by them.

To stir the Ephesians' attention still more, the Lord speaks to them, or more precisely to those capable of understanding His words, "he who has an ear."

Instead of the earthly pleasures that the Nicolaitans permitted their followers, He will give to those who overcome the temptations of sensuality a higher food.

Like the fruit of the tree of life, this food will supply the lack of vitality that appeared among the Ephesians through the failing of their first love.