How does Orthodoxy view the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Movement?

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I'm by no means any expert, but I think that in general we tend not to make judgments on what is outside our "area" ...

From what I have read, the Holy Spirit has always been active within the Orthodox Church. There is no need for a "new outpouring" as He has never stopped being active. One does tend to see more intense examples in the lives of those who seek God most earnestly though, so that we hear about it more from monasteries and those who have truly devoted their lives to God.
 
Upvote 0

Cappadocious

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2012
3,885
860
✟30,661.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
How does Orthodoxy view the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Movement?
To quote the late Fr. Thomas Hopko, "...it needs more St. Paul."

Is there anything similar happening within the Orthodox world?
No

Are there any Charismatic Orthodox Christians?
There are nominal or lapsed Orthodox who are functionally charismatic evangelical protestants, and who attend those churches. On the Non-Chalcedonian side, many Coptic Christians influenced by evangelicalism start evangelical protestant-style missions, ostensibly under the jurisdiction of the Coptic Church.

Do you believe that there is a new outpouring of the Holy Spirit now as in the past?
There is an outpouring of the Holy Spirit now as in the past, but not following a period of cessation.
 
Upvote 0

Sirlanky

Active Member
Feb 28, 2016
26
10
34
Sydney, Australia
✟15,206.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Cessationism is not the position of Orthodoxy. But the Charismatic Movement is rejected by orthodoxy also. The notion that we need to feel and be empowered by the Holy Spirit is the complete opposite of what the apostolic fathers teach us. Orthodoxy also flatly rejects emotionalism worship. Also, regarding the Coptic church comment above. Whilst Protestant thought has infected certain Coptic communities it is in no way supported by the hierarchy by the Coptic church. In fact I've only known Coptic bishops to excommucate rarely, and normally its to deal with these heterodox ideas
 
Upvote 0
Aug 27, 2012
2,126
573
United States of America
✟41,078.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
The Coptic bishops need to be doing a lot more excommunications because the Protestant/Evangelical influence is very widespread.

When I was advising an OCF chapter, some of the members of the Coptic Club of that same university were shocked that we had full, liturgical worship on campus. They wanted to use protestant praise and worship songs (some of them were involved in the OCF) at OCF. We told them no.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dzheremi
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,500
13,648
✟426,176.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Good for you. Everyone should tell them no. That stuff is just ridiculous. And when you ask them why (as I have), the people who support it say "Oh, we need this to attract people/save the youth/other stupid garbage that is idiotic on its face!" When you adopt charismatic nonsense, you only attract people who want charismatic nonsense, and saving the youth...how can you 'save' people of any age with poison?

I've basically written off a sizable portion of people involved in Coptic 'mission' activity as insane or evil until proven otherwise, and believe me, it hurts to have to say that. But I did not leave the Roman Catholic Church to get that same "Everything is permissable/we're all Christians/you're not being 'charitable' if you actually tell people no or expect them to take anything seriously" faith-murdering attitude from some yahoo with an Egyptian accent. You're not a priest because you dress like one and people call you "abouna" if all you're doing is peddling some sophomoric claptrap straight out of the Rick Warren school of how to be 'relevant' and popular with morons who don't care what's actually going on in a church so long as it says "Coptic" on the sign outside. "And the gates of hell will not prevail against it" is a promise of Christ to those who will remain faithful, not a license to do whatever you want because you're lazy and complacent and waaaaah, the westerners won't come to our church if we don't have stupid, insipid 'praise' music, worthless sermons full of fluff, "cool" priests who fill their sermons with hip references, etc. None of this insulting and disgusting trash is Orthodoxy, but it is all marketing, as though "Orthodox" is a brand and they need to redesign it. It's so gross. It honestly makes me want to never go to church. And I probably would've stopped going were it not for the fact that my particular parish didn't put up with this kind of blasphemy, because our bishop and our priests have their heads on straight. From what I've seen, the DC area and parts of Canada are a cancer, though (most definitely including the 'church' that Cappadocious linked to; I was first made aware of the problems of Fr. Anthony Messeh when HG Bishop Suriel of Australia pointed out that he had taken, word for word, large chunks of his sermons from books by Protestant pastors, and this was something like five years ago now. I know, I know...it's dangerous to judge someone else, but come on...these 'priests' need to be forcibly laicized...and/or shot into the sun. I'm fine with either. Just get them as far away as possible from any leadership role, and then get some classes set up to deprogram their brainwashed followers who have been fed this stuff.)

God save us from this evil and the people so enamored with it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Aug 27, 2012
2,126
573
United States of America
✟41,078.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
What would happen to all of this should there be reunion? I think this trend to protestanize the Coptic Church will be a bigger hindrance than the whole Chacedonian controversy!

If reunion were to happen, the EO will insist all that stops immediately.

I checked out the link above and saw the thing about the "Well". I think extending hospitality and talking to people about the Truth of Orthodoxy in a way that is understandable to modern day people outside the liturgy is great. But why the praise and worship songs? Why go from hymns and prayers with such profundity to such shallowness?

I see the same thing in the RCC too. I went to Easter Vigil in the RCC with my family a few years ago. The Easter vigil part was not bad, Gregorian chants, ancient prayers and hymns. But when they got to the Mass part, it was as if we completely shifted gears. The change was so jarring and the contrast between the two services was so drastic. I was thinking to myself, "why do these people want this? Don't they see the difference between the two services?"
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,500
13,648
✟426,176.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
I don't agree. This trend is just that: a trend. It is a huge problem, of course, but it's not like it's been here for 1600 years like the Chalcedonian problem. It's a sort of spiritual laziness/ignorance combined with a naive embrace of "American" stuff because Coptic parents are scared that their kids are going to be atheists once they go to college or whatever. When I went to New York, to the monastery, I met the youth who had only ever gone to the monastery and churches connected to it, and these kids, despite not really knowing much more than the average Coptic person (and, y'know...being teenagers and all), nonetheless had a very sharp boundary between what is appropriate in worship and what is not. They learned only hymns and sang only hymns, and when I asked them what they thought of the Catholic church that had recently been purchased in the area to be turned into a Coptic one (god-willing), one of them said that it will be great once they get rid of all the Catholic stuff in there like the organs and the statues so that it can be used as an Orthodox church, because the acoustics are amazing. So if they weren't okay with organs, and weren't okay with any non-Church hymns, I kind of doubt that they would be okay with guitars and Protestant worship songs in place of Psalm 150 at communion or what have you. And they're hardly the only young people (15 or so years younger than me, praise God) who I've met who are like that. A young Coptic lady I used to correspond with in the Carolinas (before I could actually get to a church, but I was still curious about it) once told me of a time that she had to stand up to her priest when he asked her to play the Byzantine/EO hymn "Wa Habibi" on the piano in church, because "Abouna, it's in church!" Traditionally, the sense of what is appropriate in worship and what is not has been quite strong, and I think it still is with lots of people. They just don't get talked about as much because they're not "famous" or known as trouble spots. You know how it is...the person who goes to liturgy every week and fasts and prays is nameless, but everybody knows Arius or Nestorius by name.

There are certainly regional trouble spots, and we really do need to come down much harder so as to eliminate them and prevent them from spreading (some are doing so, but there's still far too much permissiveness), but I am unwilling to call the patient dead at this time. Just to put things in perspective: My former parish (former because I moved away) was, at its height, home to no more than 40 people, and isolated to the point that I had to drive 6 hours out of state to be baptized, because that's where the nearest OO church with a baptismal font was. If any church could use the 'we need more people' excuse to justify being lax/permissive/heretical as these Protestant Coptic churches are, it was us. And yet, when we had a pair of Chalcedonian Jordanians visiting us for an extended period of time, somebody (not either of them; one of the Egyptians) asked if we might commune them, since they clearly favor our worship and theology to choose to attend a Coptic Orthodox Church in a town with so many Catholic alternatives (including Byzantine Catholic alternatives, which was presumably their confession). Father's response was that under no circumstance would he commune any Chalcedonian for any reason ever. There was also a giant sign in English and Arabic over the entrance listing the rules for communion, to make it clear to everyone that this is what we must follow. Father told me later in conversation that one of the reasons why our numbers were so low is that there were more Copts in the surrounding area, but they usually didn't show up because they knew they would not be allowed to commune, since they had married outside the church to Protestants, Catholics, etc. So we could've been softer and weaker, but that would have violated the norms of our communion which, despite how it may look in some quarters, are still norms.

I still have reason to hope that my experience was not such an anomaly, even though to people in certain parishes it probably sounds like some kind of medieval torture chamber. Meh. Better that those people leave with Satan rather than inviting him in because he's wearing a black turban.
 
Upvote 0
Aug 27, 2012
2,126
573
United States of America
✟41,078.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Perhaps you are right, and that is good what you said about the youth you encountered at the monastery. However, I can see how Coptic parishes that do the protestant stuff could become problematic should reunion occur. I can imagine them resisting being told to no longer engage in that stuff, which will happen. None of the EO bishops will allow it. Perhaps it may be allowed to phase out gradually, but it will not be allowed to continue.

It would be good to try to stamp it out now should reunion occur at some point in time in the future. At the pace Orthodox people move, that'll be quite some time in the future, lol.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
How does Orthodoxy view the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Movement? Is there anything similar happening within the Orthodox world? Are there any Charismatic Orthodox Christians? Do you believe that there is a new outpouring of the Holy Spirit now as in the past?

God bless
If interested, you would probably wish to go to here and see more discussion here when it comes to Orthodoxy and the Spiritual gifts (as seen in Feb 11, 2015, Mar 23, 2015 and
ST. SYMEON THE NEW THEOLOGIAN ). As it concerns outpouring, there is something to be said about how the Holy Spirit operates in the lives of the Saints and what occurs when His people are living in sync with him since becoming Orthodox does not automatically mean you know how to operate in certain gifts. Be it with OO or EO, I've seen it repeatedly where others may operate in things such as gifts of words of knowledge/prophetic and healing and it's not necessarily broadcast as many parts of the Charismatic movement do in sensationalism - and in other parts, they do not wholesale claim all aspects of the Charismatic world are somehow the same since many of them have direct reflection in what occurs within the Church. The issue is not separating the Gifts from Lifestyle of godliness, holiness, being devout and the many ways the Church connected with God.

The intensity you'd find in a Charismatic service is present within Orthodox services but the focus is different - and for Orthodox, the focus is more so on the Fruit of the Spirit (i.e. love, joy, peace, etc....Galatians 5:26-27) more so than going after the gifts of the Spirit. On Renewal, for one place to investigate, may wish to go here:

You may also be helped by the following resources that Orthodox have done on the issue:

I've always appreciated others known as Father Barnabas Powell whenever he talked about why he left Pentecostalism, why he was drawn to Eastern Orthodox Christianity, and how he managed to interpret/deal with the extensiveness of the Pentecostal movement. ...if going to Orthodoxy 101

As another noted best:

What I am more interested in is how Pentecostals may come to find a home in Orthodoxy. In some ways, Pentecostals and Holiness believers may approach the Orthodox Church quite differently from mainstream Protestants and Evangelicals. Those more in touch with their Holiness roots will not find in Orthodoxy the moralism of their founders, but may nevertheless appreciate our ascetical emphasis on purity. Those who especially focus on healing from God may connect with our theology of salvation as a healing process. The highly interactive character of Pentecostal services may make the back-and-forth rhythms of liturgy more accessible. Some may be attracted by our sense that everyone has a “personal Pentecost” when he is chrismated, that that first Pentecost never truly ended. And Pentecostals who thrill at the stories of famous faith healers and fiery preachers will no doubt have their heads set spinning at the stories of the lives of the saints.

On a deeper level, I believe that one of the things that Pentecostals share with the Orthodox is a lack of fear of materiality when it comes to the spiritual life—something that distinguishes them from most Evangelicals and other Protestants, who tend to shun this as idolatry. The Orthodox believe that holiness can reside in physical things, including our own bodies, and so do Pentecostals. We may not engage in “grave soaking,” but we certainly do like to visit the graves of saints and ask for their prayers. And we do have the sense that physical touch can be an important part of our connection with the saints. Our dedication to physical beauty and love for the mystical experience of worship with all five senses may be for a Pentecostal seeker a fulfillment of all his long hopes.

The appeal of Pentecostalism in all its forms is that it speaks directly to the real pain and suffering of people, to their need for healing and contact with God. While I do not believe that its methods and peculiar beliefs are the best way to do this (and in some cases are counterproductive), even the acknowledgement of this need in people is powerful and compelling. Orthodoxy, when truly lived, also sees the pain of mankind and offers true consolation and hope for resurrection.



The ways that the Charismatic and Litrugical often intersect is a very intriguing dynamic, with differing expressions and trajectories for whether you are coming into one from the other or vice versa (i.e. coming into the Charismatic from the Liturgical or the Liturgical from the Charismatic) - some notable examples are people like John Crowder when it comes to the Mystic camp he comes from in Evangelical culture, even though some do not understand where he comes from when it comes to being very much reflective of what happens in much of Orthodoxy and the Church Fathers/Christian Mystics in the Early Church noting how Christ holds all things together, more shared in Miracle Workers, Reformers and the New Mystics....and Spirit Week: The Complete Series. I first heard of when exploring the International House of Prayer movement - in part influenced by Larry Lea - and he was a very intriguing figure. He essentially was advocating the concept of Theosis froam Eastern Orthodoxy while also noting sanctification from the Wesleyan perspective - and basically walking out what many in the early Church did when essentially "living in the Wild" free....serving Christ in his love..... he really understood other saints in the Body of Christ, St. Patrick especially, who went into very wild/intensive areas where people were not reached - and knowing the resources they had in the church, those saints were able to build from the ground up/do unprecedented things when they had little to work with ....they understood presence of God and the overwhelming Love of God when it comes to Christ's love holding us together).

But with the mutual influencing of theologies, some of this has been discussed elsewhere, as seen here and here ....


Ultimately, what it comes down to for myself when seeing how things have played out in Orthodoxy is remembering the practices of the Church - and staying focused on the Gospel. I still have friends/family with others in the Charismatic movement and I still support them wherever/whenever they are preaching the Gospel and helping others realize the love of God for the world. And it is a blessing to see the ways that others have had relationship across the isle between Charismatics and Orthodox and it has been a blessing.

Some of the reactions that have often happened within Orthodoxy are more so due to the fact that many are more so bothered by anything remotely appreciating Protestant thought than they are about what the Church Fathers said - as the Fathers were never against others being passionate in their walk with the Lord nor were they against spiritual experiences within the gifts. The gifts were used throughout the history of the Church in a myriad of ways and many of the ways they were used are very similar to what one would find in a Charismatic Church - but of course, the Fathers were Sacramental and thus Charismatic Churches are incomplete with what is available to them. It's like having resources in a Jungle with a Medical Mission/camp and knowing there are far more resources in Hospitals in the City/civilization. And if you know the jungle and the many aspects of it, it's easier to navigate the greenery and obstacles. ......but as I discussed with my Coptic friends, it is still a jungle. There are versions of things in the urban/civilized world that come in a more simpler form .....and you can work with it, with much of it being effective for getting things done.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,500
13,648
✟426,176.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Sirlanky: I don't want to talk about Fr. Anthony. Again, HG Bishop Suriel has called him out in the past for stealing Protestant sermons. If that's not heresy, then there isn't any. What are Protestant preachers if not heretics? The people in the pews may be one thing (who can say that everyone who has heard him is therefore among him?), but when you give a sermon in an Orthodox church, it must be an Orthodox sermon. Period. If you are unable or unwilling to perform the duties of a priest, which most definitely include preaching and reinforcing the Orthodox faith of the Church, then you should not be one.

Greg: From what I have seen, a lot of Coptic people don't really know how to be Orthodox and American, both due to lack of experience (the oldest Coptic churches in America are barely 50 years old, if that), and due to taking bad lessons from life in America in general, which bleed into church. We're talking things like looking up to Protestant preachers because they couldn't imagine turning on a non-Coptic TV channel and hearing someone say they worship Jesus and seeing people respond "Amen" instead of getting mad, as would apparently happen in Egypt. Or on a more basic level, finding American Christianity preferable to Egyptian (y'know...it's softer and cuddlier), but sticking around because "I'm Coptic" (i.e., the Egyptian version of Christmas and Easter Catholic). This is why I am placing my hope in the younger generation, or at least some of them, who do not have such a big learning curve when it comes to sorting through the various currents of the culture, and are actually raised to love their church and see it as unique, not like others. Clearly a lot of the youth have gotten the wrong message, too (like the youth you met via OCF), but a lot of people in every generation go astray. The Church must still do its work, including calling those people back to the true faith, and so long as there are people to do that, even if it takes 100 years, that's what we will do. Lord knows we have enough work to do for many generations, but again, that's the work of every generation, in every place. There has never been a time when shallow, porous, error-ridden spirituality was tolerable, and there never will be.

I suppose your willingness to believe that things will be fixed is directly proportional to your willingness to believe in the basic Orthodoxy of the communion in question, so I don't suspect or care that many EO would see things as I do regarding the Coptic Orthodox Church. But it bears repeating, not as any kind of brushing off of your concerns, that this is exactly what we're dealing with: a situation where we need to fix our own problems for the sake of our own faith and Church, and ultimately out of our fidelity to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and not so much out of concern that this might harm our chances for reunion with your church. That is in the far off. We need to deal with this other stuff first, as you've essentially already said.

Lord have mercy.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
How does Orthodoxy view the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Movement? Is there anything similar happening within the Orthodox world? Are there any Charismatic Orthodox Christians? Do you believe that there is a new outpouring of the Holy Spirit now as in the past?

God bless
One person I've been very thankful for is Sr. Vassa. As she noted when it came to seeing others who are Protestant in any kind of way, "The Orthodox Church never denied "an 'ecclesial' reality among the heterodox." There are, as St. John Chrysostom writes, bits and pieces of "ecclesial reality" outside the Church. This is why the baptism of heretics is recognized time and again. But the "plenitude" of Truth is to be found only in the One Church." From someone who entered the Orthodox Church 6 yrs ago, the tone, attitude and balance of what she said is very encouraging as I know and have seen the Holy Spirit working in the lives of faithful Christians outside the Orthodox Church for decades and I've been blessed to do excellent work with others within/outside of Orthodoxy in various ways.

That said, one excellent review on the issue can be found here IN Modern Charismatic Movement Similar to Charismaticism in the Early Church...
.

As they noted:

At Pentecost, Peter described the sudden ability of the many Apostles gathered to speak in foreign tongues as an outpouring of God’s Spirit widely across genders, ages, and social castes (Acts 2:16-19):

[T]his is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; “And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy”….
Charismatics point to Paul’s advice to the Corinthians to desire these gifts: “Pursue love, and zealously16 desire spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy.… I wish you all spoke with tongues, but even more that you prophesied.” (1 Co 14:1, 5). Jerry Munk, former editor of the Orthodox newsletter Theosis and a rare Orthodox sympathizer of the Charismatic movement, wrote that the gifts spread beyond holy ascetics:

In the Old Testament we see many examples of the Holy Spirit coming upon people with little evidence of ascetic perfection: Samson, David, and Balaam’s ass come to mind. In the New Testament, the pattern continues: in Acts 11, the Spirit falls upon un-baptized Gentiles, while the book of I Corinthians is addressed to people who exercise the gifts of the Holy Spirit apart from the fruit of that same Spirit. After the New Testament period, we read in the Didache instructions for dealing with people exercising charismatic gifts while at the same time indulging the flesh. In none of these situations is it automatically assumed that the “spirit” behind the gift is from the devil. Just as one can receive Holy Communion unworthily, so one who is unworthy can exercise the gifts of the Spirit – but there is danger in doing so

St. Irenaeus, a 2nd century bishop, wrote as if the gifts were still frequent in his time:

“In like manner do we also hear many brethren in the church who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light, for the general benefit, the hidden things of men and declare the mysteries of God.
He also wrote:

“Those who are in truth His disciples, receiving grace from Him, do in His name perform [miracles], so as to promote the welfare of other men, according to the gift which each one has received from Him. For some do certainly and truly drive out devils.”


As it concerns the Charismatic movement, I always try to keep in mind that you have to know what specific expression of Charismatic you're even dealing with before speaking about it. For asking "What is a Charismatic?" can be like asking "What does an ocean wave look like?".......not all look the same or come in the same shape and not all are uniform in agreement. Some forms of Charismatic expression (for me growing up) were truly outright silly - and even other Charismatics dismissed it. Of course, many others were very much in line with the way that the Church Fathers and Saints lived their lives when it came to their simplicity of lifestyle and focus on the Gospel. Thus, I tend to go with a case by case basis. The Desert Fathers were well known miracle workers and their stories have always inspired me. From the Desert Fathers, many learned to operate the gifts of the Spirit, especially the gift of discernment in the area of spiritual direction. In the lives of the Eastern saints (and even some monastics living today) it is the case that you will see strong expressions of the gifts of the Holy Spirit - and we can never avoid the fact that the Saints, because of their relationship with God, are often given the gift of clairvoyance, or prophecy, or tongues, or discernment of spirits while others are given the ability to teach with great clarity and precision. So not all things Pentecostal or Charismatic today are automatically opposite of Orthodoxy.


One thing to consider, if you love Fr. Powell, is that he insists that it was his Pentecostal background that prepared him for the Orthodox Church and I can definitely see the same happening in my life. I will never forget one of my dear friends from back in the day who was Eastern Orthodox and showed honor toward those in the Pentecostal world when I was investigating and she said many are able to come into Orthodoxy because of knowing the mystical side of who the Holy Spirit was. For Orthodox, believing in the active experience of the Holy Spirit occurs in a different manner than what you'd see in the Charismatic world. I've discussed this before on the issue if icons/others experiencing healing through them (As is the case with the Wonderworking Kursk Root Icon of Our Lady of the Sign or the The Myrrh-Streaming Icons of Hawaii) whenever I've had Protestant friends wonder, as I told them (as I was told by other Orthodox) how believing in Healing and Miracles is not what the Orthodox are ever against. With the Icons, it is truly a supernatural reality..

Personally, I am a very visually oriented person and for me icons help me focus on who the Lord is and be reminded that the saints are not simply being examined by me whenever I see them....but I am actively being examined by the Saints who are in the heavens cheering us on/praying for us to continue the journey. Also, in many ways, as another said best, icons are family photos - they show a larger reality of what it means to be connected with the Body of Christ throughout the entire chain of history.


Something else that icons do - besides helping others to stay focused and adding onto the power of worship (since worship involves all of our senses, including the visual) - is that they give a breath of fresh air and an atmosphere that allows us to breathe. We're constantly surrounded by icons every day of our lives, with images in the media (be it T.V or Internet or eve music since you can have images communicated visually) constantly taking us into the heart of the world/Hell and a life without God. Icons help us to come into the world where God rules .....they are windows that are made available to escape the windows to things not of God.
All-Saints-icon.jpg

  • The Spirituality of Icons - Coptic Orthodox Diocese of the Midlands

So when I came from a Charismatic background into Orthodoxy, to see the reality of icons/their supernatural reality was astounding. I realized that healing and miracles were not separate from the Orthodox experience.

The means, however, differ since we believe in the mystical reality of Sacred Space and Relics taking us into the heavenly realm....and for practical purposes, we can consider Paul's handkerchief, and Christ's robe, and the waters at the pool of Bethesda when stirred by an angel. Whereas Charismatics tend to understanding healing happening solely through prayer/laying on of hands with people who are sick, the Orthodox tend to see healing happening within Church practices/sacramental lifestyle and holistically experienced. You're present in a monastery, for example, and the power of prayer/God's presence provides an atmosphere in which others experience healing - and others have not just healing for their physical bodies but for their souls as well since the Church is seen as a Hospital. Therapeutic.......and to a good degree, many Charismatics believe in the same experience with creating atmospheres soaked in prayer and avoiding things image wise which reflect a reality similar to the world since they know that the world is not simply physical.

Some of what you were noting was discussed elsewhere in other threads dedicated to discussing the Biblical merit behind icons, as seen here:
Originally Posted by ContraMundum
Scripture did in fact require certain artworks. We know this. We also know from history that the Temple was well decorated and rather lavish in places. What we can all agree on (and the article in the OP does not disagree with) is that the things commanded by God to be carved and used in the religion were not to be bowed down to or worshiped. So, the strict Calvinist interpretation of that (no artwork at all, no pictures, paintings or musical instruments in worship aka the RPW) is incorrect. The NPW is correct and orthodox. Hence, there should be no lightning bolt from the sky blasting you for putting pictures in your synagogue.
Gxg (G²);60897040 said:
Just found out on this recently and thought you'd like it, as it's an icon-image of the Biblical character of Samson...very interesting to consider when it comes to examining the ways early Israel was very much for the concept of icons within fellowships and not against pictures. For more, one can go to the following:
Gxg (G²);60897040 said:
idSfTKEevXYM.jpg

A 1,600-year-old mosiac found in Huqoq, Israel. Photos from Israel Antiquities Authority, photographer Jim Haberman, via Bloomberg.


Also, for more:



Gxg (G²);59234635 said:
Terms can be an issue, I think. For when one sees a painting one made of the Heavenlies or of the Messiah that done unto God's glory or prayed over for ministry--and someone appreciates it--it's essentially the same thing as adoring it. Memorial plaques (without pictures), pics of past rabbis/leaders in the hallway at the entrance and other things are all honored in one way or another..and that in/of itself is veneration.

Whenever pictures are placed up of what the Torah looks like, as has occurred here frequently over the years, one is involved in choosing to adore something....and yet the argument has been how the pictures help in thinking about what the scriptures make clear. To venerate something is about appreciation/reverence of it--and as long as there is the practice of kissing Torah scrolls occurring within Messianic Jewish synagouges or treating objects with reverence, I wonder if what occurs is condeming one thing (as others may see it worthy of condemnation) while doing the same thing in differing language/expression.

No one worships an image, but to appreciate it/hold it in reverence or consecration is another. And on the issue of venneration, people often forget that veneration was about honor--and bowing down was something even the people of God did when honoring others ( Genesis 18:1-3, Genesis 23:6-13 Genesis 33:2-4 Genesis 48:11-13 , Exodus 18:6-8 , Ruth 2:9-11 , 1 Samuel 20:40-42 1 Samuel 24:7-9 1 Samuel 25:22-24 , 2 Samuel 9:5-7 2 Samuel 18:27-29 2 Samuel 24:19-21 1 Kings 1:15-17 1 Kings 1:30-32 , etc). For those bowing down in remembrance of others who went before us, just as people bow their heads at a funeral or when seeing a picture of a departed love one out of respect. That's the basis behind icons when it comes to depictions of the saints.

If something glorious is bowed to in order to worship it apart from the Lord, that's another issue. John in Revelation had that temptation with the angel teaching him and was warned against it ( Revelation 19:1-15 )


Some say that there's a difference between a Torah scroll being kissed and an icon in an Orthodox Church since they see a Torah Scroll as a symbol of revelation while they view an icon as an image of something on heaven or earth that is to be venerated. In their view, to venerate a Torah scroll is to venerate the self-disclosure of God through ancient prophetic writing while to venerate an icon is to venerate an image..but it seems silly since veneration is occurring REGARDLESS with both sets---and the image is a artisitc portrayal of what ancient prophetic writing described.


As said elsewhere, with the ICon issue, I really wonder at times what is so difficult to understand with the concept. Within OT Israel, the objects used in tabernacle (and later Temple ) worship were prayed over/sanctified before the Lord and all of it spoke to the Work of the Lord. If studying how the objects within the tabernacle looked (which one can go here or here for more on that), it's really powerful. There was a reverence to things rather than acting as if it was common. Things like the Showbread or the Golden Candlestick, within the Holy Place which provided light, and many other instruments had a Divine Purpose ( Exodus 27, Exodus 30:27-29, Exodus 31:8-10 , Exodus 35:15-17 , Numbers 4 , etc ).
Gxg (G²);59234635 said:
Leviticus 8:10-12

Moses said to the assembly, “This is what the LORD has commanded to be done.” Then Moses brought Aaron and his sons forward and washed them with water. He put the tunic on Aaron, tied the sash around him, clothed him with the robe and put the ephod on him. He also fastened the ephod with a decorative waistband, which he tied around him. He placed the breastpiece on him and put the Urim and Thummim in the breastpiece. Then he placed the turban on Aaron’s head and set the gold plate, the sacred emblem, on the front of it, as the LORD commanded Moses.


10 Then Moses took the anointing oil and anointed the tabernacle and everything in it, and so consecrated them. He sprinkled some of the oil on the altar seven times, anointing the altar and all its utensils and the basin with its stand, to consecrate them. He poured some of the anointing oil on Aaron’s head and anointed him to consecrate him.

Numbers 7:1-3

[ Offerings at the Dedication of the Tabernacle ] When Moses finished setting up the tabernacle, he anointed and consecrated it and all its furnishings. He also anointed and consecrated the altar and all its utensils.
2 Chronicles 29:18
Then they went in to King Hezekiah and reported: “We have purified the entire temple of the LORD, the altar of burnt offering with all its utensils, and the table for setting out the consecrated bread, with all its articles.
2 Chronicles 29:17-19
THis was the case with the imagery included in the tabernacle/temple as well...and the same concept is there with Icons. They prayed over pictures they make which are physical representations of what occurred within scripture...just as the images of the Cheribum and other aspects of the Heavenlies were prayed over and the physical element was able to bring others into the spiritual dynamic of seeing what God's throne in Heaven was truly like.


It has NEVER been an issue of bowing down in worship to anything apart from the Lord--for anyone truly wishing to listen (even if you disagree)--and for some good places to investigate, one can go here to the following:


Gxg (G²);59235012 said:
IMHO...

When it comes to the commands not to make any graven images/bow down in worhsip, I think the reality behind passages such as Exodus 20:4 and many others similar was one concerning how the mode or fashion of worship appropiate to the Lord forbid any attempt to represent or caricature Him by the use of anything made when out of bounds. It is a significant stretch, however, to say that total censure of artistic expression was what the issue was. When reading Exodus 20:4, it seems that what the command was about is the totally human tendency to Create God according to the way WE want Him to be (regardless of what he "looks like" or has described his personality/character as), and for Him to be "motivated" as WE are, and to require the things of US that we require of OTHERS so that that they meet OUR (false god's) definition of what's "just"", and of course to think, evaluate, and JUDGE things as we do in our overactive religious human imaginations.

An image alone would not be a problem if that image accurately described a trait of the Lord that he described of Himself/his saints within the Word. One good place for study would be the following:
Gxg (G²);59235012 said:
Some of what occurs with ICons is similar (IMHO to what's occurring today with others who do Prophetic Art, where the artwork they make is anointed and something where the Spirit of God can be felt/seen in. The artwork takes on aspects of the foretelling nature of prophecy (i.e. predicting future events to come) or forthtelling (i.e. preaching/declaring what the Word of God says and what the Lord's heart is revealed in scripture). For more, one can look into this:



If you've ever heard of the term "New Renaissance”, things may make more sense. For this term emerged several years ago as God began to reveal His desire to release a fresh outpouring of creativity upon His people that would be a catalyst for transformation in the culture of our world. The historical Renaissance was a surge of creativity and innovation that literally brought European society out of the Dark Ages, and transformed every facet of the culture of the time. Many of the greatest works of art unto the Lord were done, from Michangelo's David to his work "The Creation of Adam", which is a section of Michelangelo's fresco Sistine Chapel...and many others:




It was a time of reformation and a tremendously significant shift in cultural paradigm, and the vehicle for this movement of change was the Arts. In recent years, others have noted how the Lord has been speaking through various leaders and prophetic voices within the body of Christ, as well as leading influencers in secular society (such as Patricia Martin of RenGen--as seen here in her book), that we are on the verge of a second Renaissance. Ultimately, God’s desire once again is to pour out His Spirit upon His people through all realms of creative expression that His heart would be revealed to the world and culture would once again be transformed.....

This is not hard to consider, IMHO. For throughout history we can see that all transformations in culture are preceded by the arts. From the Renaissance to the Impressionists, as artists reached a new dimension in ability and style, civilization responded to the change the arts ushered. .
Also, as it concerns healing, people forget how aspects of the services have a lot to do in regards to healing when it comes to things like anointing oil used by the priest to consecrate items.....and other aspects of administration within Divine Liturgy where oils and incense are used.

I always keep in mind that one of the best figures to keep in mind who walked in healing/miracles was actually a priest. Specifically, Barnabas was a Levite who was aware of the Sacramental reality of the Temple and who trained St. Paul - both before and during their time on the mission field spreading the Gospel and walking in gifts of the Spirit. So I do not separate the reality of what Orthodox priests understand in their practice from the Charismatic reality.....(more shared in Apr 2, 2013 ).

And the Supernatural and the Sacramental were never meant to be separate. Within Judaism, there is no escaping the reality of how there has ALWAYS been symbolic worship that has gone down. There was already Biblical precedent where objects and items were consecrated for Holiness and with the Lord's power (more shared in here and #35/#36 ) - for within OT Israel, the objects used in tabernacle (and later Temple ) worship were prayed over/sanctified before the Lord and all of it spoke to the Work of the Lord. It is very powerful studying how the objects within the tabernacle looked (which one can go here or here for more on that) and how there was a reverence to things rather than acting as if it was common - things like the Showbread or the Golden Candlestick, within the Holy Place which provided light, and many other instruments had a Divine Purpose ( Exodus 27, Exodus 30:27-29, Exodus 31:8-10 , Exodus 35:15-17 , Numbers 4, Numbers 7:1-3 , Leviticus 8:10-12, 2 Chronicles 29:17-19, etc. ).

Many may feel like healing is something is ONLY to get when they go to the Elders - as noted in James 5:13:
James 5:13

The Prayer of Faith

13 Is anyone among you in trouble? Let them pray. Is anyone happy? Let them sing songs of praise. 14 Is anyone among you sick? Let them call the elders of the church to pray over them and anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord. 15 And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise them up. If they have sinned, they will be forgiven. 16 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective.
On James 5 itself, Why doesn't the person himself/herself simply come to the Elders? Apparently, it was y because this person is bed-ridden. This is the only place in the NT where this preposition ("over") is used with the verb "to pray"....essentially meaning "to pray over" someone. Essentially, James envisioned a person in bed or on a mat with the Elders surrounding him/her, praying "over" him/her. The second half with "The Lord will "raise him up" was centered on implying that the person was laid low by the disease/affliction...with James obviously addressing a situation of extreme, debilitating, perhaps even life-threatening illness.

But where things get interesting is the aspect of the note on oil. Aside from Mark 6:13 (where the Apostles went around using oil in association with them praying for others to be healed), this is the only passage in the NT that recommends the use of oil for the sick. Oil was frequently used in the ancient world for medicinal purposes. And this may account for James' use of the verb aleipho ("to anoint") which emphasizes the actual physical action of pouring. Another word that means "to anoint" (chrio) is usually employed when the purpose of the anointing is religious or symbolic.

But the oil also had religious/spiritual significance in this passage - for it would represent the Holy Spirit's Power, similar to the Spirit's ministry of consecration whereby an individual or some object is set aside to God's service/purified (cf. 1 Sam. 16:13; Isa. 61:1; Acts 4:27). Essentially, the anointing here is a physical action with symbolic significance..and that goes with the context of anointing someone who was bound in sin and consecrating or setting aside of this person for God's special attention.

The concept of oil itself is highly fascinating - seeing that (again) it was something that was considered a type of medicine in Biblical times (and thus meaning that the call of going to the Elders who'd anoint with oil/pray for healing was NOT a matter of interpreting going to the Lord for healing alone as being SEPERATE from medical use). We have to be honest with the times scripture occurred in.

What does it mean to anoint with oil? I have often heard this from many - paticularly in circles where doctors and medicine are condemned in the name of trusting in the Lord being shown solely through asking for Divine Healing (as occurs often in places like the Faith Movement) - and it has always been perplexing due to the fact that the Early Body of Believers didn't have a mindset that was against medicine of any kind.

Oil had an important purpose in the first century that many in the 21 st century do not recognize. A.T. Robertson in his book Word Pictures states that oil was “one of the best remedial agencies known to the ancients.” Moreover, the Expositors Bible Commentary agrees, stating “oil was the most common medicine in biblical times.” As said there:
"There are a number of reasons for understanding this application of oil as medicinal rather than sacramental. The word aleipsantes (“anoint”) is not the usual word for sacramental or ritualistic anointing. James could have used the verb chrio if that had been what he had in mind. The distinction is still observed in modern Greek, with aleipho meaning “to daub,” “to smear,” and chrio meaning “to anoint.”
More shared in Appendix F Principal Oils of Ancient Scripture or Oils - Jewish Virtual Library or here and here in the following:



Additionally, Josephus records “during Herod’s last illness, he was given a bath in oil in hopes of effecting a cure.” Also, the Mishna, which is the oral reciting of Jewish customs, declares the medicinal use of oil also. We can even see this usage of oil in the New Testament. In the parable of the good Samaritan, Jesus tells how the Samaritan had compassion on him “went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; and set him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him” (Luke 10:34). In here we see no miraculous connotation in using oil...and there are many other places besides that.

I've been amazed at the power of oils to help in healing the human body - and have seen good uses within my own life, including the aspect of scents and aromatherapeutic treatments. For considering what the scriptures note on incense, it is interesting to consider how it was actually a means of helping others remain in health - for incense acts as a form of healing....and in example, a component of the resin made from Boswellia trees, more commonly called Frankincense, biochemically relieves anxiety.

And with regards to incense in Orthodoxy, I have been amazed at how much of a difference incense can make on the issue of healing - and many Charismatics have been intrigued at the means of healing via incense in services.

If interested, one of my dear brothers in Christ/one of the leaders at one of the fellowships I attended gave an excellent presentation on the subject of Essential Oils and the various ones available that can make a difference in the health of our bodies - just as they did in the lives of the Saints/Early Church. To listen to the audio, one can go here and here :)


That said, if I may share, from what I've seen in the EO world, I've yet to see any of the Patriarchs universally condemn all aspects of the Charismatic world nor have I ever seen the OO Popes condemn all aspects of the Charismatic world. They are careful to note what is or isn't balance ....but if coming from a perspective that anything Protestant is evil (as happens often within the camps wanting nothing to do with working with others outside of Orthodoxy), then of course there tends to be more of a tendency of fearfulness and stereotypes on all things Charismatic and Protestant. I think we have to be very careful on that and some of this was shared before:

The Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate started its own Coptic Orthodox Christian satellite television station a few months ago. For the idea was to provide Copts and Arabic-speaking Christians all over the world beneficial programming to counter the evils of society. Currently, there is now a petition to bring Aghapy TV to DishNetwork in the United States and Canada. Many have noted how many are in places where they are not allowed to even meet in church buildings or be present with others - and having access to Divine Liturgy via online service/edification is a big deal to keep others connected however they can. For there truly are times people are simply left alone for a myriad of reasons....with this needing to be accounted for.


And with the use of adaptation, things have occurred in a myriad of ways. I am reminded of what occurred when it came to the branch of Orthodoxy I investigated service with was a Coptic Orthodox fellowship (with the priest speaking using an iPad as well for his sermon notes..more shared here in #37 and here / #80 ). The screens were used mainly to show what words were being prayed during the Liturgy. I heard of other Orthodox fellowships within Eastern Orthodoxy that use other technological means like screens (as well as pews), but I didn't know if it was widespread - and was shocked at hearing others claim "PROTESTANTS are taking over!!" at the mere mention of any technological advancement - or even saying that using chairs/pews and screens was going against the heart of Orthodoxy.

But as it concerns the basis of any kind of reactions based in "That's Protestat!!!", WE actually dishonor the memory of the Church and its Popes when we do so. The Popes (at least in the Coptic Church) have often addressed the very issue on several occassions - and when it comes to those dynamics in play, I always go back to Pope Kyrillos (Cyril) IN his extensive work with others/reference irregardless of if they were Protestant - and His Grace Bishop Angaelos, General Bishop of the Coptic Orthodox Church in the UK - who has worked with RCs and Protestants repeatedly in keeping the GOSPEL of Christ central:




I appreciate what he has noted, when it comes to adaptation in light of the actual example of the EArly Church - and events where Protestant styles of worship have occurred in the Church consistently and reasonably.. We can start with events like the 2014 Coptic Youth COnference in Canada..with spoken word presentations and songs used in Protestant Churches, under the leadership of H.H. Pope Tawadros​


Saw the same thing when at the Coptic South Eastern Diocese Youth Retreat - where prior to Divine Liturgy, the youth were singing with guitar to the song "I could sing of your love forever" and other Protestant songs. They and the leaders noted that it is not an "either or" dynamic when it comes to Protestant thought/using Protestant resources as if it is somehow a turf war where one can never note appreciation (and they were all Copts, to set the record straight)....and this is not unique AND HAS been discussed before. There is a difference between incorrect practices that are essential to the faith and those that are peripheral. And of course, with the same conferences I've gone to for the Coptic Orthodox Diocese of the Southern United States, the UNITY of LOVE concept has been explained in-depth many times. Generally, only people who have convertitis assume that anything Protestant used by Copts or OO is automatically "heresy" and this has come up often....and the same goes for a lot of battles within the Coptic world when it comes to failure to remember that noting people as fellow Christians led to a loss of Orthodoxy is NOT the same as saying that appreciating/referencing thought from other Non-Orthodox Christians means Orthodox ideology does not remain distinct. There are plenty who've noted that extremes occurring do not equate to going with things as they should - as DC-Coptic Churches have had to note when it comes to the allegations brought to them by others in the Coptic Church because they have actually gone and visited churches of others or referenced them in differing ways - and have gone counter to the Radical Protestant ideology that says no changes in Liturgical practices have ever happened or the claim that nothing outside of the Coptic experience is 'of the Lord' when the truth is that people have gotten out of an exclusive mentality that limits the work of Crist. Some of this been discussed before here and here in Father Anthony speaks to President Obama: Ancient Churches & the President of the U.S

G



That is definitely something that I think could be considered, as it concerns working with what's already present and adapting that for the sake of outreach since one does not have to come up with something from scratch when other things are already close enough to what's looked for.


Regardless, on the OP article, I do appreciate what one of my dear sisters in Christ noted when she said the following:

Chrysostom shortened the Liturgy. (We still use both the longer St. Basil Liturgy and the Liturgy of St. James in the EO, something like 2-6 times a year.) .....As one of our close friend is a Professor of Liturgics, I hesitate to comment much. I do question the term "change", as really the changes seem more so cuts, restatements, etc. The "new" additions generally were to include matters that had to be settled by Ecumenical Council; i.e., they exist as statements that reflect then existing understanding that had to be stated more explicitly in response to popular incorrect teachings. But something else the authors (albeit after only a cursory look) seem to have missed, is the value of repetition. The seasons are no less stunning for their repeated appearance - if one notices. In some ways, repetition allows one to be alert to what one "needs" (as our needs change), at other times to plunge into the inexhaustible depths of meaning, and so forth. Huizinga (in the aforementioned book) names high play as distinctly human, and Liturgical worship as the highest form of play. (And was the rare western writer who actually tackled and valued anamnesis. Come to think of it, there is something of anamnesis priming it may be in the repletion of Liturgy). :)
It all goes back, of course, to how one understands the concept of change in Liturgy and the reasons behind it to occur. If a change in Liturgy is being made in order to more effectively communicate the Gospel in certain areas - then I can see why it would be reasonable to do certain changes while keeping the content. Shortening the Liturgy for certain areas is not something that goes against the Gospel when considering the fact that there was never ANY rule saying a DIVINE Liturgy had to be an hour-and-a-half long in order to be DIVINE or for the presence of Christ to be present. Moreover, for others saying "Shortening it is just Protestant!!!:", one would also have to logically show where keeping it at length is somehow NOT Protestant since it was often said by many that they prefer a longer liturgy due to feeling it seems right and not easy - but that goes right back to one's preference, which is the same thing others have noted when it comes to it being shorter.

Change is not a negative thing when the focus is on Christ - as the author of the original article pointed out. OCA actually spoke on this very issue before, as seen here in The Changing Face of Our Liturgy | Wonder:


g
We proclaim every time we celebrate the Divine Liturgy and gather in the Eucharistic assembly that God has revealed this service to us as a means of communion with him and each other, and an access point to the Kingdom of God. This is something held as simple truth in our tradition and attested to in our liturgical texts (“We thank Thee for this liturgy…”). Our liturgical celebrations are a divine gift and revelation. The content of this revelation is not necessarily the liturgical actions themselves, but rather Jesus Christ Himself. The liturgy is not the revelation, but the process of revealing Christ to us in his word, in praise, thanksgiving, and in his mystical presence.

How and Why Can our Liturgy Change?

If the liturgy is the process of Christ’s revelation to his people, then why does it change and develop? What are we to do with the now very concrete historical evidence that our Liturgy has evolved substantially over the past two millennia, through planned, non-spontaneous and repeatable reforms that are unquestionably the creative output of a small group of human beings? The historical reality of the liturgy appears, then, to stand in conflict with the liturgy’s claims of divine origin. How can it be a divine gift and revelation if specific individuals (John Chrysostom, Theodore the Studite, Patriarch Nikon of Russia, Basil the Great, etc.) deliberately change it?

St. Theodore the Studite left a profound impact on our liturgical services

Robert Taft, the eminent liturgical historian answers this question by presenting the Liturgy as an ongoing dialogue between the Lord’s gift of revelation to us, and the human response. It seems, though, that the Divine Liturgy deliberately constructs a tension on a deeper level, which cannot be resolved through Taft’s answer. The tension created in the liturgy is the result of the Liturgy’s primary function. It is an encounter between the temporal and the eternal; the human and the divine. Therefore, as much as the liturgy can be described as the human response to the Lord’s revelation, it should also be seen as the context within which the revelation is given. Thus, the revelation of Jesus Christ does not evolve, but is merely encountered anew at every iteration of the Divine Liturgy. He who “makes all things new” (Revelations 21:5) is encountered in a unique and new way every time we all gather to celebrate the Divine Liturgy.

The content of the revelation, that is Jesus Christ, of course does not change, for Christ is “the same, yesterday, today, and forever” (Heb 13:8). Rather, the changing process of revelation is the context in which it is offered. The context involves the response of men and women; the organic Church, which, like all creation, is in a constant state of change. This human engagement with the revelation – our liturgical action – is dependent upon context, upon time and place. We are the slate upon which the revelation is written. But none of us is a tabula rasa. We have our personal and social experiences, and it is onlythrough these earthly experiences that we are able to hear the Gospel and understand. Therefore, The Church cannot be static and lifeless, but always strives to communicate the eternal truth of the Gospel – the revelation of Christ – in the ever-changing context of society. Christ our God is not the clay idol of a lifeless body of static believers, but the God of the living (Mark 12:27), organic Church, and our Liturgy struggles to preserve this relationship, although the tension continues to exist.

The Divine Liturgy is a ritual re-presentation of the revelation of the divine economy realized through our Lord Jesus Christ, which we know also from scripture. Both the scriptural and the liturgical epiphany suffer from the ‘scandal of particularity’ that accompanies the Incarnation. Christ was a Jewish man from Nazareth in the first century, who spoke Greek, was friends with fishermen, etc. The Epistles and Gospels narrating his life and death are recorded in the Greek language, written in a time and place, by a person, for a specific audience, etc. These facts – these particulars – form the context of the revelation. Again, this social context is absolutely necessary for memory and for text. The Lord can only make himself known to us through some medium – some context – that we will understand, beginning first with the medium of creation.

Creator and creation

The Liturgy is Flexible, but Still Eternal

So history shows us that the Liturgy is somewhat malleable, and changes on occasion in order to better communicate the Gospels to the present generation. But our experience of a single Divine Liturgy leaves us with no such impression of flexibility, but instead a profound sense of eternity in the ritual. Like the texts of scripture, the Liturgy presents itself as authoritative, autonomous, and independent. It is a closed system with its own encoded method of interpretation. And the Liturgy, being a complete event, needs to retain no memory of past instances of rituals. The revelation is re-presented anew at each altar each week (or day). Both the autonomy and the singularity of the Liturgy are brought to the foreground at the Cherubic Hymn. The liturgy does not expect people to bring ideas to liturgy from the outside, but the faithful must “Lay aside all earthly cares” in order to “receive the King of all…” Shortly thereafter, the priest introduces the anaphora (in Chrysostom’s Litugy) by giving thanks “for this Liturgy, which [the Lord] has deigned to accept at our hands…” Thus, the liturgy is able to present itself as true and eternal because it brokers an encounter with truth and eternity, while it does so through the within time and space, and within the social context of the participants.

…lay aside all earthly cares…

It is also important to note that the Divine Liturgy does not overtly authorize liturgical reform or change. However, the changing social context inevitably works itself into the service as a creative and often theological response to the Liturgy, for various reasons. The reforms can be introduced by edict, as Justinian demonstrated with his introduction of the hymn Only-Begotten Son, or even by a charismatic leader like John Chrysostom who likely introduced his new anaphora to Constantinople after arriving there from Antioch. And once reform occurs, it is ratified by the priest’s and congregation’s completion and re-enactment of the reformed rite once a change has been introduced.

Why do we Hold Onto Old Stuff?

Our awareness of the creative human influence on the Divine Liturgy leads us next to questions of obsolescence. Why do we still keep obsolete vestiges of a defunct society? The incorporation of the Imperial Court into the Hierarch’s liturgical garb, for instance, has lost a great deal of relevance since 1453, and particularly in democratic political states today. The principles of liturgical conservation serve not to explain, but only to label this conservative phenomenon. The explanation for Orthodox conservation lies in our steadfast affirmation of the apostolicity and catholicity of the Church. In part, elements of the past are retained in our liturgical worship as a symbolic index of our adherence to Tradition. But the anaphoras of Chrysostom and Basil each witness toward the ritual value that our Liturgy accords history. Theanamnesis, of the Last Supper is not merely a recitation of a myth, but a commemorative re-presentation of the events being narrated. The boundaries of time are collapsed, and we are no longer temporally separated from the events of the Last Supper, from the Passion and Resurrection of Christ, and ultimately, we are ritual participants in the manifestation of God’s saving plan. It would be premature of us to extract prior additions to the service, because these additions once served to bring a people into communion with our Lord.

Bishop Matthias vested in the Sakkos, once the garment of the Byzantine Emperors

Furthermore, we maintain a belief of God’s constant, guiding, action within the course of history, and affirm this with our prayers thanking him for “this[iteration of the] liturgy.” The liturgy is not valid in theory, any more than one can call a prayer book a liturgy: it is not; the liturgy must be performed. But if the performance is to be ritual and not drama, it is dependent on the belief of the faithful, that through the current Divine Liturgy in which the faithful are participating, our Lord can be encountered. If we accept this basic proposition on faith, then the liturgy is allowed to change over the course of time so that we can experience it, not because the revelation has evolved, but because the context has changed, in which the revelation occurs.




.....I am very open/upfront on the diverse background I had growing up. Elsewhere, I've shared before on how I grew up going to Catholic Churches...more so within the Black community (here and here/here, here, here, and here and here) - with what I experienced in the Catholic school I attended and what my sister/mother both experienced (as Afro-Hispanics) being radically different than what I saw lived out in differing Catholic Churches when there did not seem to be a lot of emphasis on the community/social justice and the poor......or a dynamic of not getting satisfied within Catholicism with regards to learning on how to be devout/love your neighbors.

But with my experience being with communities who needed a lot of help practically and were willing to work with others to get things accomplished, I witnessed consistently the narrative that it takes working cross-culturally for the Body of Christ to be effective in what it was designed to do.

Growing up as it concerns my experiences with Traditional churches, it was not odd to hear discussed the ways that Catholics and Baptists or Baptists and Anglicans or Charismatics and Orthodox needed to learn how to work together in order to be a light in our culture. Others may be uncomfortable, but I will always be reminded on the example of Archbishop Iakovos when he joined with Martin Luther King and networked to deal with significant issues in his time like discrimination, prejudice and many things that defined the Civil Rights era and are still present today in the same forms:






I will ALWAYS be thankful for the examples of other Baptist preachers who made it possible for me to have the Civil Rights I have today - as seen with others like MLK and others fighting for equal rights as is the clear case with Archbishop Iakovos of America marching with Dr. King and his working with other Southern Baptists for a reason that many did not like......and it took a lot for them to do as they did.
It took working cross-culturally to make a lot of things happen - and a lot of that occurs when you're theologically fluent in what others believe and understanding that I don't have to look like you to see where God's Image is in you and where others are not respecting God's Image in both of us. And many of these interactions involved those from a High Church culture. As another noted best when speaking on the film known as Selma (on the history of the Civil Rights) - as seen in The KKK, Selma, and Southern Christianity:



During the film, we learn about the murder of Jimmie Lee Jackson, a young African-American protestor, who was gunned down in a town near Selma. After his murder by police, King issued a clarion call to anyone in America who wanted come to Selma and join him in the cause to fight for voting rights.

As a theologian, this is where the movie became really interesting. Those who joined King were mainly Jewish, Protestant mainliners from the North, Roman Catholics, and Greek Orthodox. Conspicuously absent were conservative Protestant evangelicals, especially those from the South. In fact, Archbishop Iakovos of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America was the highest ranking non-black religious figure in America to join King in the Selma march. This raised several questions for me: What was different about Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic traditions that allowed them to freely join the fight for voting rights while evangelicals chose to do nothing or join the cause to support Jim Crow? Where were the Calvinists who believed in total depravity? Where were the evangelicals? Where was Billy Graham? Where were the Jonathan Edwards fans? Where were the Presbyterians, Southern Baptists, Methodists, and so on? I am asking because I do not understand.


And as another noted best in Sometimes the World is Black and White: Archbishop ...:

In the years that followed Selma—marked by the subsequent legislative triumphs initiated by the Civil Rights Movement, and the expanding enlightenment of society around race and equality—more and more people, including the vast majority of Greek Orthodox Americans, came to appreciate Archbishop Iakovos’ role in the Civil Rights Movement. Today, Greek Orthodox Christians in America rightly take reflective pride in the courage, vision, and dignity that Archbishop Iakovos displayed in the face of hatred, racism, and persecution. Iakovos, unlike most of his white hierarchical contemporaries in the Roman Catholic and major Protestant Churches, especially during the early years of the Civil Rights Movement, was a consistently outspoken foe of racial intolerance and inequality throughout his entire period of archiepiscopal leadership. Indeed, eulogizing the Archbishop’s death in 2005, Rev. King’s widow, Coretta Scott King, reflected that “at a time when many of the nation’s most prominent clergy were silent, Archbishop Iakovos courageously supported our Freedom Movement and marched alongside my husband, and he continued to support the nonviolent movement against poverty, racism and violence throughout his life.”

Without a doubt, Iakovos’ personal life experience growing up persecuted and discriminated against as an Orthodox Christian in Kemalist Turkey significantly influenced his unique perspective and distinguished him from other white major religious leaders in America. Archbishop Iakovos knew all too well the harsh realities that defined life as a member of a minority traumatized by a history of enslavement. Growing up as a Greek Orthodox Christian and citizen of the Republic of Turkey he had confronted daily the legacy of enslavement: the humiliations and insecurity that came with living in a society where his basic freedoms and rights were denied, where persecution, oppression, and arbitrary violence against his community were commonplace and justified by law. Given his past, Iakovos identified with African Americans in ways that most Americans, including most Greek Americans, were never aware of or could never fully comprehend.

Ultimately, it was Iakovos’ faith that decisively determined his engagement with the world. In short, the Archbishop was an unwavering, consistent advocate of the Civil Rights Movement because he was an Orthodox Christian, in deed and action, not only in word. For Iakovos, some of the most basic principles of Orthodoxy—freedom, equality, justice, and the dignity and worth of all lives—were existential realities for all of humanity, because of God’s grace. Denying people basic rights, persecuting individuals and communities on the basis of race, religion, or culture, constituted a rupture with God because it desecrated our sacred responsibility to accept and love all of humanity and to recognize that each and every person, regardless of race, is created in the image of God. At Selma, Iakovos took the very unpopular action, at that time, to stand alongside Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., in defense of the powerless, the disenfranchised, the downtrodden, and the poor because the Archbishop not only preached theology, he lived Orthodoxy. Iakovos was determined to bring the beauty of his faith and Church into the real and sometimes ugly and brutal world, locking arms with Rev. King as a sign that we all must participate in transforming the world around us.

There was no ambiguity in Archbishop Iakovos’ decision to embark upon the road to Selma—for him it was a moral obligation. He truly revered and practiced the tenets of Orthodox Christianity, including the realization that there are moral absolutes, that often there is a right and a wrong, that, indeed, the world is sometimes black and white, and that such truths warrant recognition and action in their defense. This is the fundamental lesson to be drawn by the noble, inspiring example set by Archbishop Iakovos at Selma.

10924789_771118109646013_4274875801922181954_n.jpg


10940565_771118432979314_1264707197962924868_n.jpg


10924694_771118259645998_1218703827540986079_n.jpg



The work between Protestants and non-Protestants did not simply happen with that example alone as it concerns Orthodoxy and the Baptist Church as the same dynamics regarding God's heart for justice happened in other ways as well. God said "Hate evil, love good; maintain justice in the courts." (Amos 5:15) and I am glad for pastors/leaders respecting the issue to call it what it is when it came to noting the power of God's working in the entire Body....people coming to mind like Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh in the legacy he left behind - and for leaving behind things that still stand out to this day ....and thankful for radical Catholics working with radical Protestants to deal with things in radical times.

HesburghAppreciation3.jpg




Of course, I've seen within the Body of Christ where there has often been an unwillingness to work across the isle due to theological concerns - and of course, I can understand that. But there are differing ways others within Liturgical Ancient Church Traditions can go about this process without feeling like they cannot connect with others not a part of the Early Church model or having fullness. Being Orthodox, I will speak from the Orthodox perspective predominately - but on the issue, awhile back there was an interesting article on the issue that seemed to really address the issue well of what happens when there are discussions on unity within/outside of Orthodoxy. As said there (for a brief excerpt):​

A

From what I have encountered, most Orthodox see that some light exists outside of Orthodoxy, but the fullness of the faith only exists inside of it. As Father Georges Florovsky essentially stated, we can see the canonical boundaries of The Church, but not the charismatic boundaries of it.

Christ can be and is encountered outside of the One Church – that is how converts are drawn in. I, too, am a Protestant who has been exploring Orthodoxy and am preparing to be a Catechumen. I have met Christ outside and no Orthodox I have engaged with, including the Priests I have spoken much with, have ever denied that – but they have all affirmed that the fullness of the Faith lies only in Orthodoxy.

I think the economia extended by most (though not all) Orthodox dioceses towards those baptized in other Christian traditions in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit when Protestants are received into Orthodoxy through Chrismation is a testimony that they believe there has been an encounter – that there is “something” there, but it is a shadow of the fullness.

For me, my experience growing up Presbyterian to Campus Crusade in college and evangelicalism later was all a part of the encounter that has led me to where I am now. A seed was planted when I was a teenager to find the early Church, though I decided to work from the present back to the past instead of beginning with Scripture and then proceeding on to Clement, Ignatius, Irenaeus, Justin, etc. I think our cultural bias to prefer newer things (theology, scholarship, and writings in general) had an influence. It’s newer, so it must be better. That is so different from ancient thought where it was believed that those closer to the Creation were much wiser than those that came later. Law of Entropy, anyone?

That article came to mind after one of my dear friends noted something in his own article (from an Oriental perspective) and he was glad I was able to share the article with him since it really helped - believing ourselves to be the One True Church doesn't mean that we believe no one else is a part of the Body of Christ or unable to be worked with/used by Him. You do not need uniformity in order to have unity in Christ :)

In light of the many discussions on the matter, what I've witnessed is that what Orthodox means (as the Orthodox Church considers herself "one, holy, catholic, and apostolic") and what Protestants hear are different things, because they come at it from opposite understandings......

More specifically, what one may hear depends on what it is that they are able to see as well. Hearing someone say (As an example) "I hate religion!!!" will bring a different image to their mind when they hear of and make them think the person is not one for organization or any spirituality whatsoever - and in many cases, it does mean that exactly. However, when having a real life conversation/relationship with others (like another Christian brother or sister in arms) where you see their heart and see who they are and what they actually do, they can say the same phrase of "I hate religion!!" and know they do not mean that they are against organization/disciplines ....and your image is impacted in what you see mentally since you understand they are coming at things from an entirely different perspective with regards to them being against anything that is done for its own sake but divorced from the heart of God. Some of this I say in light of a conversation held back in 2012 called "Why I Hate Religion, But I Love Jesus" video + Orthodox rebuttal

But on how relationship/interaction actually impacts our vision and what it is that we see, I do think a lot of it is at play when it comes to what Protestants are able to experience of Orthodox when it comes to how they may see it. Not all Protestants were ever remotely the same or coming from the same trajectory - but based on what other Orthodox have heard, their vision is already impacted before seeing them ....and the same goes for the Protestants in what they hear when they see Orthodoxy, as many encountered over-zealous converts saying anything not Orthodox was garbage and then witnessed them break ties with family/friends or denouncing them at every turn - leading Protestants to think that being Orthodox implies hating anything not part of the Orthodox world.

And in those cases, what got their attention in a healthy manner was experiencing other Orthodox who were easy to relate to.... I've seen others, as a case study, within EO who were shocked that converts were trying to rail saying that somehow anyone not part of EO was not part of the one True Church and automatically 'unsaved' when there was no basis for them saying as they did. I've seen others in EO surprised at people assuming they could ever say they know the Holy Spirit does not work within the Protestant world or actively use others there to reach out to the unsaved. It all goes back to what actually occurs - and of course, I've been thankful for the Orthodox I've encountered who have been more than excited to work with Protestants/anyone willing to preach the Gospel since it offers the opportunity to show who the Lord is to the world - and to clarify with others (unaware of Orthodoxy) what life is actually like with the Orthodox since it is often seen as mysterious by others outside of it.

I'm thankful for the Orthodox I've met/had relationship with who have a mindset of "Come and See" and are open about what they believe while also working with others where they're at. This for me is something that needs to be more visible since many are not even aware of where the Church itself has already done work with Protestants on several occasions and not seen it as a problem. There is much cross-polinization of thought that seems to have always occurred within Orthodoxy - and saying that someone is a part of the One True Church does not mean that they are able to say that no one else is a part of God's Body. Having the right atmosphere for how things plays out impacts a lot of what is or isn't discussed.

I just got back from a retreat back in February where one of my good friends goes to Holy Transfiguration Greek Orthodox Church and yet we got to work serving other men in demonstrating the love of God for people with a myriad of broken situations......praying with them to know the heart of the Father and yet also enjoying what the Lord was doing in our lives as well as the lives of other Protestants there. One of the actual Protestant leaders (Baptist) spoke there on the need for others to do more study on the sacraments/historical review and it was fun being able to be open on where we stand while keeping Christ central. The organization we worked in was entitled Tres Dias (more here, here and here) which is basically a 3-day weekend for encouragement/support of believers in Christ.

With my friend, I've always been blessed by how he is Greek Orthodox and yet he had no issue working with others in differing faiths---and not having a mindset of misrepresenting what others believe simply because they're not Orthodoox or giving the impression to others that said "I'll only respect/talk to you once you believe as I believe..."

We discuss the reality of Orthodox Brotherhoods like Brotherhood of St. Moses the Black with Fr.Moses Berry (whom my spiritual father used to work with before) and Brotherhood of St. Herman of Alaska and many other Monastic Brotherhoods ...and of course, we got to discuss others we valued, such as my friend's spiritual father Fr. Paul (whom I've had friendship with - was so excited to see him becoming a priest!!!)....as Fr.Paul REALLY encouraged me on several occasions and was a life-saver when I had a very bad situation where I was slandered badly - his wisdom helped me navigate things a lot. With my Greek Orthodox friend, it's a blessing discussing how wow we are able to network with other Orthodox in our area, some in places like St Basil's Orthodox Mission (OCA) (https://www.facebook.com/St-Basil-Orthodox-Mission-653315421382997/ ) who also network with Protestants .....I was surprised when last summer one of my good friends (who's Protestant) noted how one of his best friends attended St. Basil and I thought "Seriously?? Small world!" :) With other places networking has occurred , it has been wild seeing first hand how family/friends at St. Mary Coptic Orthodox Church of Atlanta actually had active relationship with other Russian Orthodox - as was the case when one of my Coptic friends (a linguist and scholar on differing types of liturgy) noted his experiences in going to one of the churches in our area called St. Mary of Egypt Orthodox Church - always being welcomed anytime/having wonderful discussions ... and of course, seeing that my Coptic friend/others where he is already work with other EO often in sharing works together, it's not a surprise. Witnessing this firsthand after going to Divine Liturgy with them and prayer, including recently to see the The Kursk-Root Icon, it has made me remember how odd it is when others seek to have what can be akin to a xenophobic attitude toward anything they do not understand or haven't experienced

My good friend/sister in Christ Thekla and I once discussed the issue on Facebook considering our own backgrounds when I told her on some of the work I've seen within Orthodoxy and some of the things not well known. @Philothei and I discussed it as well, as it concerns what has happened before where the Patriarchs were ignored and folks still tried to claim that somehow tried to claim things based on an older era that is not present.....as seen, for example, with regards to how others often assume anything Oriental Orthodox is not connected with Eastern Orthodox - and thus are unable to actually listen to the facts when seeing OO in intercommunion with EO (Antiochians with Syriac Orthodox as an example and I've experienced that numerous times already) or Official Statements from the Bishops. @Philothei ,one of the older members on CF, was always able to address the dynamic whenever we talked and it is always an interesting thing seeing others having to take some time understanding if explaining that Antiochian Orthodox have worked with Syrian Orthodox (Oriental) - with others in the camp identifying with them/having family present whom they discuss with and in that sense being OO while also identifying with EO (my situation personally.....as I've shared here and here/here).

For some in EO, they automatically assume that an OO referencing something from EO must somehow mean that they 'left' OO - and the same goes for others on the OO side when seeing EO reference things pertaining to the EO side. It's difficult for others to really comprehend the fact that both things can occur with intercommunion....but others are able to understand it thankfully. In example, my going to see His Holiness Pope Tawadros II (very precious to me and others in OO) or enjoying discussing Miracles of Pope Kyrillos because of background in the Syriac Orthodox Church (especially in regards to my Jewish heritage) would not be opposite of my passion for the Antiochian Orthodox Church because of my background in that (as my spiritual father was an EO Monk/priest who also worked with others OO). And of course, when seeing that they already had intercommunion with the Syriac Orthodox Church and are connected, there's no issue for me.

And at the end of the day, seeing the nuanches, it's better for me to say 'it's complicated" :) when explaining your journey...

It's really easy to stereotype a lot of things in the Orthodox world - and that's not surprising since many others do not have understanding of some of the workings of the Antiochian world.

In example, Thekla and I were once discussing how odd it is that people make Orthodoxy out to not believe Protestants have the Holy Spirit operating in them when there is already active work showing otherwise.....and within the Antiochian Church, we've already worked with Protestants before on civil issues. As an example, one group others can investigate which Antiochians are a part of:


CCT is a coalition of five Church Families, Historic Protestant, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Evangelical/Pentecostal, and Historic Black along with Christian service organizations. The Orthodox representation in this organization continues to be the same six Orthodox jurisdictions, three Eastern (Antiochian, Greek, OCA) and three Oriental (Armenian, Coptic, Syrian). All proclamations and statements issued by CCT are the result of consensus by the member bodies.......
CCT in a Nutshell

Christian Churches Together provides a context – marked by prayer, worship and fellowship—in which churches can develop relationships with other churches with whom they presently have little contact. This is one response to our Lord’s Prayer that all who believe in Him might be one with God and with one another so that the world would believe in Him as God and Savior.

CCT offers the possibility of face-to-face relationships with participants across denominational/Christian community lines or racial/ethnic divisions. As participants grow closer together in Christ, differences are better understood and commonalities affirmed. In praying and studying the scripture together, spiritual resources are deepened and prophetic voices strengthened. There are new possibilities for shared witness, new coalitions formed among churches on various issues. CCT, out of its commitment to grow closer together in Christ, offers a significant and credible voice in speaking to contemporary culture on issues of life, social justice and peace.


cct-banner.jpg

Besides that, There were some good discussion articles made by another Orthodox brother whom I've followed for awhile. He's a priest and goes under the name OrthoCuban. For more:


And of course, you also have others who work with Orthodoxy in the fact that they study patristics and work in the Protestant world seeing what Christ is about, like like Thomas Oden, one of the most prominent Paleo-orthodox theologians‎ and one who is very passionate about patristics (especially in regards to African saints/churches ...as seen here and here /here )), just as it's the case that others within Orthodoxy are evangelical/connected to that world (such as Bradley Nassif of Simply Orthodox | Ancient Faith Ministries
...or Metropolitan Kallistos Ware--concerning his speaking often on Orthodox and Evangelicals learning from one another...) or reference materials by others in the world outside of Orthodoxy - such as what has often occurred whenever reference is made to others great Christian thinkers such as C.S Lewis....the one many still feel was an underground/covert Orthodox for many various reasons when examining his stances and articulation of them:)

Ultimately, The focus is working with believers in the Body to strengthen them and help Christ be glorified - even though it is understood where fullness may be present more so than other places by others. Noting where there's fullness of truth in one place - as said in Orthodoxy - doesn't equate to saying there is no truth in other places or that others can't learn from other places.

Many in the Early Church who were Church Fathers/leaders didn't have the mindset that all things in the Church were close to perfect or that being involved in other parts of Christendom were a negative since (as said in Orthodoxy) "We know where God is but we don't know where He isn't :)

Others may not be complete in understanding as we understand it - or where we think they should be - but they are believers in the Lord whom Christ works in....and as the Lord said, " “ no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40 for whoever is not against us is for us." ( Mark 9:39-41 ). Our desire to have others come to our way of thinking can often be used to cloud the reality of where others belong first/foremost to Christ and what Christ is doing where they're at which we can be thankful for.

As another Orthodox said best
Everything good and everything bad that can be found in any church of any denomination can also be found in some form or another within the Orthodox Church....None of the arguments pro and con convince me either way. The Church is the Church is the Church...When God the Father looks at the Church the only people He sees there are those whom He has drawn to His Son Jesus, and no others.

....Don’t you think that the spirit in me recognizes the spirit in another man whether he even calls himself a Christian or not, as being my brother in Christ?

....In Christ we are a meek and faithful bunch, but in the world we are the most anarchisticand uncooperative of mankind. It’s no wonder the world hates us, whether we are Orthodox or not, Christian or not, religious or not, articulate or not.

The important thing is, whose friend are we? God's or the world's?

As said elsewhere, You really don't see believers across the boards knowing how to be neighbors - or ability to talk/encourage one another if they don't support us fully - and we end up diminishing the work of the Lord in others while exalting it in ourselves. ...and yet we could have done so much more good learning how to discuss so as to help others either cross over in God's time or know how things are so as to help not allow ignorant comments/stereotypes to occur on what we value in a camp.

As another noted best when it comes to the issue of crossing over and how that occurs (for a brief excerpt):
I am glad in that my former home church provided me with a warm Christ centered fellowship where I could study Scripture, and read up on theology and church history. I found it quite frustrating that many of my Evangelical friends were not able to understand the questions I had about the basis for Protestant theology. So when I became Orthodox, many were surprised and a little confused, but we remain friends. My experience has been more like a friendly border crossing. I picked up my belongings and one Sunday morning I crossed the border into the Orthodox Church. ...I feel sad for those whose transition has been marked by suspicion and judgment. It is my hope that open relations between Protestants and Orthodoxy will not be replaced by a Cold War atmosphere marked by barbed wires and aloof guards with grim stares. Barbed wires and restricted exit are signs of defensiveness and tyranny. An open and healthy society is marked by hospitality to strangers and mutual respect among its members. More preferable is a Glasnost in which Protestants can read up on the early church fathers and the Ecumenical Councils, and investigate the issues of icons, the Virgin Mary, and liturgical worship. In this period of openness curious Protestants should feel they have the freedom to visit the Orthodox worship services and come back with questions about what they saw. The best defense is not: “Those people are wrong!” but “Come and see!”

And you can learn something from everyone - just as it is in the classroom on college or on the job. As another individual noted when it came to issue of noting what you lose by not becoming Orthodox:



Everyone who is seeking God is on a path, or road, to finding Him. When you drive down any given road there are things put in place to help you stay on the road and know how to get to your destination: pavement, lane dividers, signs, guard rails, lights, etc. The more of those things there are, the better chance you have of staying on the road. But the more of those things you take away, the more likely it is that you might lose your way, veer off the road, and not get to your destination.

What one loses by not being Orthodox is all these "helps" on the road. All that Christ has given the Church was given to her in order to help us stay on the right road, going in the right direction. The Scriptures, Councils, icons, incense, etc, are there in order to help us stay on the path of finding the True God and coming to know Him. The farther one goes from Orthodoxy, the more of these aids one loses, and the more likely it is that one will no longer be seeking the true Christ.

To be sure, just because one is Orthodox doesn't mean that one will stay on the road. I can ignore the signs and drive off the road thinking I know my way better than the Church. Also, many people who are not Orthodox are on a path to finding Christ, and just because someone doesn't have all the benefits that Christ has given to the Church doesn't mean that they will necessarily veer off the road or that they won't reach their destination. So not only can we not say that non-Orthodox will not be saved, but we also cannot say that all Orthodox will be saved. The signs and guardrails on the road do not guarantee a successful trip, nor does the lack thereof guarantee a disaster.


tumblr_nx4oz64MGn1rtbneio1_1280.jpg


Moreover, as there are many Orthodox parishes/Bishops who work with others in the Protestant world anyhow, it is not a new reality to see others not bothered by anything concerning any kind of renewal - OR really, identification. You would probably be blessed by individuals such as Sr. Vassa & Archbishop Iakovos .....
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I'm by no means any expert, but I think that in general we tend not to make judgments on what is outside our "area" ...

From what I have read, the Holy Spirit has always been active within the Orthodox Church. There is no need for a "new outpouring" as He has never stopped being active. One does tend to see more intense examples in the lives of those who seek God most earnestly though, so that we hear about it more from monasteries and those who have truly devoted their lives to God.
So true....that is how I was trained to see it as well.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I see the conversation is branching into more than one direction here, and I'm interested in the others, but have no knowledge about it. So I'm reading, but not trying to derail or change.

However, the OP and GxG's comment got me to thinking about "spiritual gifts".

I listened to Fr. Seraphim Aldea's podcast "Through a Monk's Eyes" on Confession, which I found wonderful. He suggested, among many other things, how to approach your priest during Confession with the intent of using him as a tool to hear what God would say, and his advice was very similar to what I've heard in reading one of the Saints (I forget who but wish I knew) who said basically that if one approaches one's priest/Confessor for guidance, and that person lacks the experience/knowledge within himself to advise on an issue, that if one approaches humbly and with the expectation of help from God, the priest will be given the words from God to help the person, beyond his own ability.

I have tried both pieces of advice and found them to be true. Without going into detail - believe me, it was in both cases EXACTLY what I needed to hear, though not necessarily (or at all really) what I WANTED to hear (which is a further tiny little confirmation for me that it can be from God). And in one case my priest said outright that he did not have the experience to advise me, and in the other I realized that he had misunderstood what I was saying, so his advice still did not come from his natural response (to something deeper I had not managed to articulate anyway).

I hope that is enough to explain. In Pentecostal circles this kind of thing could easily be called something like a "word of wisdom" or a "word of knowledge" or "personal prophecy". But being Orthodox, it was simply part of a conversation between myself and my priest, both in and out of Confession. The kind of thing that can happen thousands of times every day throughout the world.

I believe the Holy Spirit DOES work within Orthodoxy, in both great and small ways. We just don't shine a spotlight on it and blow trumpets and give it various charismatic titles. All that does is potentially puff people up with pride and put people's focus on seeking "gifts" and that can be very unhealthy. But yet "gifts" and the working of the Holy Spirit are ESSENTIAL for the health of the Body, and so yes, it happens. (Though of course as Scripture warns, we are capable of "quenching" these quiet gifts if we are not careful.) It's all still true, all still Scriptural, just a different way of looking at things.

BTW, I'm not wishing to speak badly of the Pentecostals and Charismatics who on the whole are simply seeking God as openly and with their hearts as much as they know how. They are just trying to build the pure faith from the ground up, like many others have felt forced to try to do. They simply don't have the benefit of the very vast storehouse of treasure the Orthodox Church holds. Indeed, sometimes I think it is the very vastness that keeps others at arm's length. I'm realizing that they often see just one facet, and reject the whole utterly because they think that one face is the totality of Orthodoxy, and especially if they don't understand it, it seems to them incompatible with what they themselves know of spiritual things. Given the current discussion, the Liturgy is a good example for Pentecostals, who see only that and think it represents the whole of our experience, and so reject the entire faith out of hand as seeming "dead" to them, without realizing that yes, there are demons being cast out, miraculous healing going on, miracles, words of knowledge delivered on a regular basis, and so on. Just within the right context.

Peace to all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gxg (G²)
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,470
20,026
41
Earth
✟1,456,009.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
How does Orthodoxy view the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Movement?

not our concern, since it is outside of Orthodoxy

Is there anything similar happening within the Orthodox world?

not really.

Are there any Charismatic Orthodox Christians?

yes, but they are few and far between. they are certainly not mainstream in the Church.

Do you believe that there is a new outpouring of the Holy Spirit now as in the past?

no, the one and same Spirit has been at work since Pentecost. we have always had grace filled men and women that have special charismatic gifts.

God bless you too!
 
Upvote 0

Light of the East

I'm Just a Singer in an OCA Choir
Supporter
Aug 4, 2013
4,989
2,480
75
Fairfax VA
Visit site
✟555,654.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
not our concern, since it is outside of Orthodoxy



not really.



yes, but they are few and far between. they are certainly not mainstream in the Church.



no, the one and same Spirit has been at work since Pentecost. we have always had grace filled men and women that have special charismatic gifts.

God bless you too!

This is a very interesting subject. I wonder why it is that in the "modern Church" we do not have more miracle workers? And I wonder if the working of miracles is reserved only to the ordained, or should we expect that those in the laity who are holy can be blessed with God's grace in this area?
 
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,470
20,026
41
Earth
✟1,456,009.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
This is a very interesting subject. I wonder why it is that in the "modern Church" we do not have more miracle workers? And I wonder if the working of miracles is reserved only to the ordained, or should we expect that those in the laity who are holy can be blessed with God's grace in this area?

We have miracle workers, even to this day. Recently glorified St Paisios of Mt Athos was a lay monk and he was known for his many gifts.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Light of the East

I'm Just a Singer in an OCA Choir
Supporter
Aug 4, 2013
4,989
2,480
75
Fairfax VA
Visit site
✟555,654.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
We have miracle workers, even to this day. Recently glorified St Paisios of Mt Athos was a lay monk and he was known for his many gifts.

Dear Brother Matt -

I should have qualified my question. I know that there have been many holy monks on Mt. Athos who have been miracle workers. What I am questioning is that there are not more of what we might term "laity" who have these gifts also.
 
Upvote 0