| Some “Not-So-Obvious” Facts about American Orthodox Christianity Contemporary Issues Last Updated: Feb 8th, 2011 - 05:50:02 Some “Not-So-Obvious” Facts about American Orthodox Christianity May 1, 2010, 10:00 Discuss this article Printer friendly page Source: The Patriarch Athenagoras Orthodox Institute The “Orthodox Church Today” study released by the Patriarch Athenagoras Orthodox Institute (Graduate Theological Union) disproves many stereotypes and provides groundbreaking insights into the life of one of the least known American faith traditions – Orthodox Christianity. With its historical roots in nineteenth century Russian Alaska, today Orthodox Christianity in the USA accounts for about 1,200,000 – 1,300,000 faithful worshipping in 2,200 – 2,300 local parishes (congregations) spread all across the nation. There is no single “American Orthodox Church:” Orthodox Christians in America belong to nearly twenty different Orthodox Churches or “jurisdictions” – the word Orthodox use instead of Protestant “denominations.” The “Orthodox Church Today” is the first national survey-based study of the ordinary parishioners in the two largest Orthodox Christian Churches in America: the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (GOA) and the Orthodox Church in America (OCA). Here are some interesting facts about the American Orthodox Christian community. 1) The common stereotype is that the Orthodox Churches in the USA are “ethnic” Churches of certain immigrant communities. The study shows that this not the case anymore. Nine out of ten parishioners in both GOA and OCA are American-born. Further, today, more than one-quarter (29%) of the GOA and a majority of OCA (51%) members are converts to Orthodoxy – persons born and raised either Protestants or Roman Catholics. 2) Not all Orthodox are equally “Orthodox.” The study found that the gaps between the “left” and the “right” wings in American Orthodoxy are wide and that American Orthodox Christians are deeply divided among themselves in their personal “micro-theologies.” Answering the question “When you think about your theological position and approach to church life, which word best describes where you stand?” the relative majority (41%) of church members preferred to be in the safe “middle” and described their theological stance and approach to church life as “traditional.” At the same time, quite sizeable factions identified themselves as being either “conservative” (28%) or “moderate-liberal” (31%). |
| Excerpts from his diary supplement our understanding of how St. Nicholas related to Buddhism. Here observations are also marked by the fact that they were made by a practicing missionary. Thus it is with, for example, the theme of the Buddhist priests’ resistance against Christianity. The saint calls them outright “enemies of Orthodoxy”, who “do not miss any opportunity to take advantage of existing circumstances in order to trouble the Orthodox and weaken Orthodoxy—which, however, they have thus far not been able to do.” “In their sermons, the bonza revile Christianity with all their might, but through this they are only showing their own confusion, and that they do no know what to do” (II, 205). The catechist “Paul Okamura related that bonza in plainclothes often come to him asking about Christianity, but then only use the knowledge they gather to pervert it and make it food for derision. Around [catechist] Matsuda the bonza have formed regular gatherings, always unbearably blaspheming against Christianity and forbidding others to listen to him. This, according to Matsuda, brings the exact opposite result: it only arouses people’s curiosity and they come to ask about Christianity” (II, 223). It is worth noting that the holy hierarch was never perturbed by these displays of aggression from Buddhism, and considered it a sign of Buddhism’s inner weakness in the face of Christianity. He writes, “In Ebishima, an especially strong hatred against Christianity was aroused, and a society was even formed to defend Buddhism against Christianity; but this is only a sign that Christ’s teaching is beginning to more deeply occupy the people’s attention. As a counterweight there are no few pagans who, not yet even knowing about Christianity, become defenders of it against angry attacks” (III, 383). “In Nakatsu … the bonza were very troubled by the success of Christianity—they formed a union against Christianity, give sermons and revile it. Just in time! There are working for the good of Christianity by popularizing it; Buddhism has no defense against it” (IV, 31). And truly, soon the news came from Nakatsu of converts to Orthodoxy, “one of whom was a sworn Buddhist, and now he is an equally zealous Christian” (IV, 65). |
| May is the month for college graduations. It is a time of new beginnings for Orthodox Christian college students across the country as they transition out of campus life and into adulthood. Graduation season is also an opportunity to look at Orthodox campus ministry in America and its well-being. The health of campus ministry is a key indicator of the future health of Orthodoxy in America. College students are by far one of the most at-risk groups in the Orthodox Church today. Young men and women on college campuses are confronted with an environment that is increasingly hostile to Orthodox Christianity. Living Orthodox beliefs on a college campus often means presenting oneself as a subject of ridicule. At many colleges, an Orthodox Christian worldview is considered at best a superstitious relic and at worst a form of bigotry. The peer pressure that Orthodox Christian college students face to set aside their beliefs and remain silent about their faith has never been greater. This is the reality facing Orthodox campus ministry today On the surface, everything appears well with campus ministry. There are conferences, mission trips, and retreats throughout the year. Social media is alive with updates. One would think that college students are doing just fine when it comes to staying connected to the Church. However, appearances can often disguise more serious concerns. The Assembly of Orthodox Bishops in the United States has produced a 114-page research study of Orthodox Campus Fellowship. A study of the facts presented in this report shows a number of challenges when it comes to Orthodox college students. These issues demonstrate that the present model of Orthodox campus ministry is struggling to fulfill its mission. Compared to other Christian groups on campus, the Orthodox Church has been underperforming for years when it comes to ministering to college students. Orthodox Campus ministry efforts have been downsized considerably over the years. Today there are only two dedicated staff for North American ministry which is a 75% reduction in program staffing from June of 2012. A review of campus ministry’s strategic plan shows a series of goals that have gone unmet for years with the most significant failure being the neglect of the regional coordinator program as well as regional chaplaincies Campus ministry also provides scarce stewardship information to alumni, donors and volunteers Organizational by-laws, minutes from board meetings, annual reports, and regular financial information are all unavailable on the national website. The Board of Directors has been reduced from 19 diverse members in 2010 to 9 members in 2016 with little effort made to recruit leaders who can bring new perspectives to campus ministry. |
| One of the cornerstones of Orthodox Christianity is its reverence for the great Fathers of the Church who were not only exemplars of holiness but were also the greatest intellectuals of their age. The writings of men like St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory the Theologian, and St. Maximos the Confessor have been and will always remain essential guides to Orthodox Christian living and Orthodox Christian faith. Thus it is alarming that so many Orthodox clerics and monks in recent years have made public statements that reflect a “fundamentalist” approach to the Church Fathers. And unless leaders of the Orthodox Church unite to repudiate this development, the entire Orthodox Church is at risk of being hijacked by extremists. Like other fundamentalist movements, Orthodox fundamentalism reduces all theological teaching to a subset of theological axioms and then measures the worthiness of others according to them. Typically, this manifests itself in accusations that individuals, institutions, or entire branches of the Orthodox Church fail to meet the self-prescribed standard for Orthodox teaching. For example, when the Theological Academy of Volos recently convened an international conference to examine the role of the Fathers in the modern Church, radical opportunists in the Church of Greece accused it and its bishop of heresy. The key intellectual error in Orthodox fundamentalism lies in the presupposition that the Church Fathers agreed on all theological and ethical matters. That miscalculation, no doubt, is related to another equally flawed assumption that Orthodox theology has never changed—clearly it has or else there would have been no need for the Fathers to build consensus at successive Ecumenical Councils. The irony, as identified by recent scholarship on fundamentalism, is that while fundamentalists claim to protect the Orthodox Christian faith from the corruption of modernity, their vision of Orthodox Christianity is, itself, a very modern phenomenon. In other words, Orthodoxy never was what fundamentalists claim it to be. |
| A.V. Nesteruk 1. Introduction Orthodoxy and Science: Special Experience It is widely accepted in historical terms that Western Christianity had the first, deep impact on natural sciences, which led later to the problem of relationship between science and religion as a cultural, academic and ecclesial issue. Arthur Peacocke, a leading scholar in the science and theology dialogue within the Anglican tradition, admits in his book Theology for a Scientific Age that the experience of Eastern Christianity in engagement with science was different. 1 The Orthodox theologian S. Harakas also argues, in one of the rare papers on the Orthodox perspective in science, that “Orthodox Christianity has a special approach to science”. 2 Despite the recognition of the “difference” of this experience, the meaning of this difference has not yet been fully articulated and investigated anywhere in the literature. This book formulates in stages some aspects of the Orthodox approach to the problem of science and religion. In some ways, this attempt will be orientated toward a specific historical form of Orthodox religious experience as compared with Western Christianity. The “specialness” of the Orthodox experience in relationship with science and its difference from the Western forms of the dialogue between science and religion are ultimately determined by such essential theological underpinnings as the nature of theology, the nature of the human ability to know God, and the understanding of humankind’s place in the universe and role in the mediation between the world and God. The evolving differences between the Western and the Eastern Christian approaches to the natural sciences themselves constitute a serious historical problem: why the impact of Greek Classical culture with Christianity in Western Europe, which had been articulated by St. Augustine of Hippo and eight centuries later by Roger Bacon, has an absolutely different long-term effect on scientific development and the progress of technology when compared to eastern parts of Europe, where people’s ways of living and theologizing were for many centuries closer to the Greek Patristic tradition, and different from the Latin tradition, to which St. Augustine belonged. 3 One mystery involves why, by the twelfth century, Greek Patristic thought and Byzantine theology, with their deeply cosmic dimensions, were nearly forgotten in Western Europe. 4 This book does not pretend to be a complete historical research; it argues, nevertheless, that what was forgotten – that is, the so-called Greek Patristic synthesis, which forms the basis for all Orthodox theologizing – contains in itself the secret of that special attitude to science that Orthodox theology followed throughout the centuries. |
| Power in the Church is not about who kisses one’s hand but how many feet one can wash in the service of Christ. Pope Francis made this clear when he visited a youth prison in 2013 and chose to wash the feet of the offenders including one who is an Orthodox Christian. “Real power is service. The world will be watching from May 24-25, 2014 as Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople and Pope Francis welcome each other in Jerusalem to observe the anniversary of the historic encounter between Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras and the subsequent lifting of mutual anathemas. The main focus of the many scholars and reporters who will cover this event will be the elusive question of “Old Rome and New Rome” that is the question of unity between Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christians. However, hidden amidst all this media coverage will be a unique opportunity for Orthodox Christians to follow the example of Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras of blessed memory and to meet the Pope of Rome again as if for the first time. At first glance, the idea of Orthodox Christians being able to learn from the Pope of Rome appears out of place if not altogether wrong. However, Orthodox Christians should pause before rushing to judgment about such matters and remember that prior to the Great Schism of 1054, the Pope of Rome was honored with reverence and respect throughout the Orthodox World. Today, Orthodox Christians honor many Popes of Rome as saints including St. Leo the Great, St. Gregory the Dialogist and St. Martin the Confessor. Orthodox Tradition celebrates the lives of many Popes throughout the liturgical year. Despite these facts, one of the present realities that is most disappointing is how some of our brothers and sisters have portrayed the Pope of Rome. “Dictator” and “anti-christ” are just some of the clichés that have been sadly used. While there have certainly been corrupt Popes throughout history (as there have been corrupt Patriarchs), Orthodox Christians must ask themselves whether or not the last 35 years have greatly challenged such stereotypes, especially when it comes to Popes such as John Paul II , Benedict XVI, and the current Pope of Rome, Francis. Orthodox Christians should especially pause and take notice of the unique witness of Pope Francis. He is in many ways a bishop who reflects the Christianity of the first millennium when the Church was undivided. Pope Francis also models a form of leadership that is greatly needed in Orthodox Christianity today. |
| Thomas E. FitzGerald 10. HERITAGE AND VISION The visit of Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios of Constantinople to the United States in 1990 served as an important affirmation of the significance of Orthodox Christianity in this country. While the Orthodox jurisdictions continued to look toward greater administrative unity, many signs of a mature presence and a fruitful mission were clearly visible. The Orthodox in America numbered over 3 million, gathered into over 1,500 parishes. Through their concern for liturgical and spiritual renewal, theological studies, ecumenical dialogue, and evangelization, the American Orthodox in recent decades had strengthened their own mission and witness in this country. They had also become a major influence upon Christianity throughout the world. 319 THE VISIT OF THE ECUMENICAL PATRIARCH Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios I of Constantinople, together with a delegation that included five Metropolitans made an unprecedented visit to the United States 2–29 July 1990. Among the delegation was the present patriarch, Patriarch Bartholomew, who succeeded Patriarch Dimitrios in 1991. Although other Orthodox Patriarchs had visited this country in the past, this was the first visit of the Ecumenical Patriarch. His visit had a special significance because he is viewed as the first bishop of the Orthodox Church. As such, the Ecumenical Patriarch is frequently looked upon as the spiritual leader of the 300 million Orthodox Christians throughout the world. Moreover, according to Orthodox canon law and ecclesiastical practice dating from at least the fourth century, the Patriarch of Constantinople has special responsibility for overseeing the development of the Orthodox Church in lands beyond the boundaries of other autocephalous churches. 320 When he arrived in Washington, Patriarch Dimitrios spoke of his mission: In particular as Ecumenical Patriarch entering this land, I reflect upon the fact that our Church took root here and flourished for whole generations, thus contributing also to the great and historic advance of the American people, to its attainments, in sharing its problems, its progress and its dreams for a better mankind. Today, Orthodoxy is not a strange and alien factor in America. It is flesh of its flesh and bone of its bones.... I greet warmly and without exception all the faithful children of the Orthodox in this country.... As the Ecumenical Patriarch, I convey to all the Orthodox of this country my love and blessing, and assure them that the full unity of the Church, by canonical order, has never ceased and will never cease to be my principal concern. 321 |
| Chapter VI. The Social Problem in the Eastern Orthodox Church Christianity is essentially a social religion. There is an old Latin saying: unus Christianas nullus Christianus. Nobody can be truly Christian as a solitary and isolated being. Christianity is not primarily a doctrine or a discipline that individuals might adopt for their personal use and guidance. Christianity is exactly a community, i.e., the church. In this respect there is an obvious continuity between the Old and the New dispensations. Christians are «the New Israel.» The whole phraseology of Scripture is highly instructive: the Covenant, the Kingdom, the Church, «a holy Nation, a peculiar People.» The abstract term «Christianity» is obviously of a late date. From the very beginning Christianity was socially minded. The whole fabric of Christian existence is social and corporate. All Christian sacraments are intrinsically «social sacraments,» i.e. sacraments of incorporation. Christian worship is also a corporate worship, «publica et communis oratio,» in the phrase of St. Cyprian. To build up the Church of Christ means, therefore, to build up a new society and, by implication, to re-build human society on a new basis. There was always a strong emphasis on unanimity and life in common. One of the earliest names for Christians was simply «Brethren.» The church was and was to be a creaturely image of the divine pattern. Three Persons, yet One God. Accordingly, in the church, many are to be integrated into one Body. All this is, of course, the common heritage of the whole church. Yet, probably, this corporate emphasis has been particularly strong in the Eastern tradition and does still constitute the distinctive ethos of the Eastern Orthodox church. It is not _________________ «The Social Problem in the Eastern Orthodox Church» appeared in The Journal of Religious Thought, Vol. VIII, No. 1 (Autumn/Winter, 1950 – 1951), pp. 41 – 51. Reprinted by permission. to suggest that all social aspirations of Christianity had been really actualized in the empirical life of the Christian East. Ideals are never fully realized; the church is still |
| Archbishop Mark of Berlin and Germany Issues an Open Letter to the German Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops Source: ROCOR Archbishop Mark of Berlin and Germany, First Vice President of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia and ruling bishop of the German Diocese, appealed to his brother hierarchs of the German Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in which he objects to the one-sided coverage of events in Ukraine. Vladyka Mark points to the intolerable pressure being exerted upon the traditional Ukrainian Orthodox Church under its canonical leader, His Beatitude Metropolitan Onouphry of Kiev and All Ukraine. The letter also mentions the political pressure being placed on other Local Orthodox Churches. At the same time, the hierarch of the oldest Orthodox diocese in Germany urges open dialog between the members of the Assembly of Bishops in Germany, which has suffered serious harm, as has all of Orthodox Christianity throughout the world, from the unilateral actions of the Constantinople Patriarchate. Vladyka Mark stresses that the Church must not be drawn into the sphere of political conflict and division, which does not serve the matter of peace. Archbishop Mark also mentions the peace-making experience of his own diocese, which made an active contribution towards the overcoming of the old division within the Russian Orthodox Church, which directly contradicts the processes that are in play initiated by the enemies of the Church. Dialog must be held, in his opinion, in the proper way under today’s circumstances, a challenge to the President of the Assembly of Bishops, Metropolitan Augustine, whose signature under the “tomos” is mentioned critically and with sorrow: An open letter to all members of the Assembly of Orthodox Bishops in Germany Munich, January 30/February 12, 2019 The Feast of the Three Hierarchs: John Chrysostom, Gregory the Theologian and Basil the Great Your Eminences and Excellencies: It is with a saddened heart that I, as archbishop of the Russian Orthodox Diocese of Berlin and Germany (ROCOR), take this opportunity to clarify our diocese’s position on the current developments among the Orthodox. |
| Beware of the Orthodox Bobos Photo: Shutterstock Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. – Matthew 15-16 In his 2001 book Bobos in Paradise, author David Brooks coins a new word, Bobo (pronounced to rhyme with “go-go”), to describe the new elites of the modern age. This group combine the Bourgeois worldview of capitalist enterprise with the hippie values of Bohemian counterculture on social and moral issues – thus Bourgeois-Bohemian, or Bobo. In the two decades since the book was published, the world has changed a great deal. No longer does the West simply fight wars to secure democracy around the world, but the governments of “enlightened” secular societies team up with corporations and big tech to promote new “progressive” values worldwide – sexual promiscuity, gender confusion, racial politicization, and family destabilization. It should be no surprise that in the decades since its debut, the Bobo has found its way into all areas of life, including places as foreign to its spirit as the Orthodox Church. Since the nature of the Church is hopeful, this should provide opportunities for the transformation of the soul of the Orthodox Bobo. Yet the transformation which is at the centre of the Christian life is unthinkable to the Orthodox Bobo: he does not come to be transformed, but to transform everything around him. And herein lies the beginning of the problem with the Orthodox Bobo. The secular Bourgeois seeks status, often linked with wealth. For the Orthodox Bobo, this search for status can take different forms, seeking personal prominence through a cultural community, a Church jurisdiction, or representing either one to those outside the Orthodox Church. For converts to the Orthodox Faith, this will sometimes take the form of a living roleplay within the Orthodox Church, of some cultural or religious nostalgia. While this roleplaying will enjoy all the costumes, rituals, and titles that go along with it, the essence of Orthodox Christianity – the faith, life, beliefs, and moral values – won’t be present. These contradict the individualism of the Orthodox Bobo. |
|
|
