What is Orthodoxy?

Most of this post is a comment I left over at Fr. Jake's a few days back. It seems like a lot of Christians, but especially certain Anglicans these days, use the term "orthodoxy" to denote a vision of our faith that's grounded in absolutes, defined by strict boundaries. But, in my own study of and thinking about the "undivided" church of the first four centuries A. D. (it wasn't half as unified in doctrinal matters as we'd like to think, but it's still a worthwhile starting point), I'm not sure that the church fathers really viewed orthodoxy, which means "right teaching", in such uncertain terms:

I'm really drawn to the idea of orthodoxy being a lot more accommodating than folks on both sides of this "debate" (the current brouhaha that's ostensibly about sexuality, but really is a fight over biblical interpretation) make it out to be. I'm struck by the thought that most, if not all, of the "heretics" in the early church were trying to narrow down Christian doctrine, to find the "right belief" that all disciples must hold to. For instance, one early controversy involved the gospel accounts. A priest named Marcion, at least I think it was Marcion, was concerned that the church had authorized FOUR separate, sometimes competing, accounts of our Lord. He attempted to teach that only ONE (maybe John?) was correct, and the other three were not inspired. However, the unified voice of the church held to the importance of having several different takes on Christianity's central story. This is orthodoxy.

Also, the christological controversies that came later are another example. By affirming that Jesus is BOTH fully God and fully man, the councils were repudiating the various, narrower views that were beginning to be taught (Christ only appeared to be human, the eternal Logos departed from the human Jesus on the cross, etc.). I know this is a huge oversimplification of the various heresies and the ecumenical responses, but I think my point stands nonetheless.

Anyway, I think those who claim orthodoxy as a warrant for exclusionary thought and action need to take a fresh look at the orthodoxy of the undivided church, as do those who are tempted to abandon the concept altogether in response to these abuses. The church is big enough for competing theologies, and it always has been. This is no liberal innovation or conservative compromise, but the heart of orthodoxy, not to mention the gospel, itself.