is tradition the locus of the orthodox faith?

[FireDragon76]

In my experience, many Orthodox priests read the same "secular humanist" stuff as any mainline Protestant minister, it just doesn't play as significant a role in how they understand their faith. I was always amazed how my spiritual father could read feminist theologians and appreciate them and yet it seemed to have little effect on his conclusions about what the Church should be doing. I got a bit tired of that, but then I probably never really was that kind of Orthodox, the high church kind that points to the grandeur of the Church as an enduring institution as evidence of its truthiness.

I think I am right in saying that the concept of sacred tradition is the center locus some Orthodox use for understanding their faith in Jesus- Jesus as giving us the unchanging pattern of tradition. It explains how nothing could phase my priest, no matter how compelling. It is a "high church" kind of view, that Orthodoxy points to the Church embodying the Cosmic Christ more than Jesus as an historical person.

OTOH, I think there are some Orthodox that are much more like us Evangelicals, that are centered on Jesus and what he brings to us a cosmic presence but also as an historical person, known like any other historical person, by reading about him, scholarly study and reflection. And those types might be interested in ways that the Orthodox Church could accommodate itself to modern culture, since their theological locus is not the concept of unchanging sacred tradition, it's something else... perhaps they are "Evangelical Orthodox" and not "high church Orthodox".

 

[All4Christ]

In my experience, many Orthodox priests read the same "secular humanist" stuff as any mainline Protestant minister, it just doesn't play as significant a role in how they understand their faith. I was always amazed how my spiritual father could read feminist theologians and appreciate them and yet it seemed to have little effect on his conclusions about what the Church should be doing. I got a bit tired of that, but then I probably never really was that kind of Orthodox, the high church kind that points to the grandeur of the Church as an enduring institution as evidence of its truthiness.

I think I am right in saying that the concept of sacred tradition is the center locus some Orthodox use for understanding their faith in Jesus- Jesus as giving us the unchanging pattern of tradition. It explains how nothing could phase my priest, no matter how compelling. It is a "high church" kind of view, that Orthodoxy points to the Church embodying the Cosmic Christ more than Jesus as an historical person.

OTOH, I think there are some Orthodox that are much more like us Evangelicals, that are centered on Jesus and what he brings to us a cosmic presence but also as an historical person, known like any other historical person, by reading about him, scholarly study and reflection. And those types might be interested in ways that the Orthodox Church could accommodate itself to modern culture, since their theological locus is not the concept of unchanging sacred tradition, it's something else... perhaps they are "Evangelical Orthodox" and not "high church Orthodox".

For what it’s worth...I truly believe you can be “evangelical” and still hold fast to the theology, teachings and yes, practices we are given. We shouldn’t be stuck in a pattern that doesn’t adapt in some ways - but it doesn’t mean that we can change our beliefs to what much of modern culture mandates.

My parish does a pretty good job with this...I am very thankful for it. We have outreaches to help society (such as a coffee shop that raises money for local charities, helping out local charities with volunteer work, etc.), Bible studies, services at local colleges, social media, giving opportunities for youth to be involved, singing arrangements written by parish members, pan-Orthodox outreaches, etc. We have many catechumens on a regular basis. It is a family for all who desire to be a part of it. Certainly we have ways to improve - I am just using our parish as an example.

People are drawn to the Faith that was, is, and will be in the future. That doesn’t mean that we don’t also know Jesus personally, learn about Him through scholarly and study, reflection, etc. We do have to look at the needs the Church has today, but that doesn’t require an adaptation to beliefs. It needs to be a holistic approach.

ETA: If there is a need for something like deaconesses, then I would be open to it...but the change would need to be for a purpose, not just to change it. It wouldn’t necessarily match what women deacons are in with some other Churches. An example of this are the deaconesses recently ordained in Africa.

I also would love to have young girls participate more in the services - and I am working on a potential program for it - but there are many ways to do that beyond altar servers, etc.

 

[FireDragon76]

I am just surprised that somebody that believed their church was the true church, with the divine promise that it will overcome Hades, would be upset by the possibility of a woman serving the altar, if that is what the church desired. It makes me think the theological locus is elsewhere, other than on Christ and his promises. It's on a certain conceptualization of tradition.

Mainline Protestant churches have not been that shaken up by having women pastors. We've lost members but its not that clear what caused that (probably just the end of the cold war and the accompanying loss of normalcy of churchgoing, coupled with falling birthrates). In my own Lutheran tradition, the LCMS never really was on the same page with the LCA/ELCA and women's ordination had little to do with that, except the equivalent of giving a few dirty looks.

Frankly, in my own church, I wish we cared more about tradition. Our worship is downright humble. I get tired of the pastor changing prayers, settings, and tunes at a whim, for "variety" sake. Half our language about God is without real pronouns (no doubt an academic affectation due to modern university education's proclivities for "gender sensitivity"). But I go to church because I'm a Jesus person, and that is where I encounter Jesus as both a cosmic presence and an historical person. I could never put the cart before the horse, as much as I want to.

 

[All4Christ]

I am just surprised that somebody that believed their church was the true church, with the divine promise that it will overcome Hades, would be upset by the possibility of a woman serving the altar, if that is what the church desired. It makes me think the theological locus is elsewhere, other than on Christ and his promises. It's on a certain conceptualization of tradition.

Mainline Protestant churches have not been that shaken up by having women pastors. We've lost members but its not that clear what caused that (probably just the end of the cold war and the accompanying loss of normalcy of churchgoing, coupled with falling birthrates). In my own Lutheran tradition, the LCMS never really was on the same page with the LCA/ELCA and women's ordination had little to do with that, except the equivalent of giving a few dirty looks.

Frankly, in my own church, I wish we cared more about tradition. Our worship is downright humble. I get tired of the pastor changing prayers, settings, and tunes at a whim, for "variety" sake. Half our language about God is without real pronouns (no doubt an academic affectation due to modern university education's proclivities for "gender sensitivity"). But I go to church because I'm a Jesus person, and that is where I encounter Jesus as both a cosmic presence and an historical person. I could never put the cart before the horse, as much as I want to.

If the Church decides that girls can serve at the altar, then I would accept that. However, as a layperson, I will accept the teaching of the Church on this and not try to change it. I can still accomplish (along with my parish) a way for girls to serve while not changing the practices we are taught. After all, even Paul said to be obedient to our leaders. There are some Antiochian churches with altar girls. I wouldn’t skip attending the Church because of that. The OCA, however, does not permit that - and I will abide by it.

I wouldn’t agree with ordination of women to the priesthood, though perhaps for different reasons than some Evangelical Protestant Churches reject women pastors (We still teach that women certainly cans preach, evangelize, be hospital chaplains, etc.

And yes - certainly, Jesus should be the primary focus for all. Everything should be about worship and faith in God and our Lord Jesus.

 

[FireDragon76]

I realized a long time ago that many Orthodox have entirely different objections to women in ordained ministry. I can respect that, even though Evangelical Lutherans have a very different view of ordained ministry and are enthusiastic supporters of women's ordination (however, our churches largely call men to be pastors, a preference I suppose). It does not amount to automatically viewing women as "defective" which is sort of the attitude you get in some Protestant churches.

It's good that Orthodox women serve as chaplains, I was not aware of that.

My main point is that Gurney's comments were very illuminating into an aspect of Orthodoxy I never really understood. It actually brings me a measure of comprehension and even peace in where I am at, religiously.

Fortunately, I am in a church were the "high church" elements are restrained. They exist in our tradition: people that focus more on the confessional symbols and our sometimes obtuse, often scholastic theology than Jesus as a living person (they can sound more "Lutheran" than Christian sometimes, though I'm sure they would see it differently), but they are tone down by pietistic devotion and a generalized appreciation of humanistic and churchly scholarship.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

This is a faulty conclusion, FD. You're basically saying that because the Church cannot be overcome by Satan (in the long run that is true), then automatically the Church decreeing female altar servers would somehow be something we should sanction and accept. Hmmmm. What about when the Arians were running the show in the Church for a while? Ask St. Athanasius and the boys how it was when the Church fell into darkness. Or ask the Orthodox what it was like for around 200 years of iconoclasts running the Church with their blasphemous idiocy. The Church ABSOLUTELY CAN be hijacked and poisoned. What we are assured by the Lord is that in the longterm that will not stand. So, just as Arianism was hip and en vogue at the time, and just as iconoclasm was the cool thing to do for a couple centuries, and were both eventually (thanks be to God) overthrown and crushed, don't underestimate the sins of modernity and the feminist movement and secular nonsense to cloud the judgment of hierarchs. It has happened before. It is the long game that is unbeatable.

The locus isn't elsewhere. And don't be surprised. As a student of history, the Church has ebbed and flowed. Long game....

I also disagree with your analysis of women's ordination not having much impact on mainline Protestants. Since women's ordination, abortion, the LGBT movement, cohabitation, and loose morals have taken hold. I don't see that as a coincidence. But then again, I see Protestantism as a fundamentally defective, flawed concept and broken body anyway...doomed to fall into error the minute they entered the oblivion of falling away from an already-fallen-away body---Catholicism.

I am just surprised that somebody that believed their church was the true church, with the divine promise that it will overcome Hades, would be upset by the possibility of a woman serving the altar, if that is what the church desired. It makes me think the theological locus is elsewhere, other than on Christ and his promises. It's on a certain conceptualization of tradition.

Mainline Protestant churches have not been that shaken up by having women pastors. We've lost members but its not that clear what caused that (probably just the end of the cold war and the accompanying loss of normalcy of churchgoing, coupled with falling birthrates). In my own Lutheran tradition, the LCMS never really was on the same page with the LCA/ELCA and women's ordination had little to do with that, except the equivalent of giving a few dirty looks.

Frankly, in my own church, I wish we cared more about tradition. Our worship is downright humble. I get tired of the pastor changing prayers, settings, and tunes at a whim, for "variety" sake. Half our language about God is without real pronouns (no doubt an academic affectation due to modern university education's proclivities for "gender sensitivity"). But I go to church because I'm a Jesus person, and that is where I encounter Jesus as both a cosmic presence and an historical person. I could never put the cart before the horse, as much as I want to.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I rarely disagree with my dear friend, All4, but in this I must---I will not ever accept this nonsense. It's hard to believe the Antiocheans would accept this. The altar boys share in a mystical way in the priest's priesthood when at the altar. They are a mystical extension, and really altar boys are supposed to find inspiration in their priest for a possible vocation. My own priest made that clear. I've heard it from other Orthodox clergy. The boys share in the role, and they (some) hopefully will find inspiration to seek some kind of ordination someday as a result. Girls could never do such a thing.

If the Church decides that girls can serve at the altar, then I would accept that. However, as a layperson, I will accept the teaching of the Church on this and not try to change it. I can still accomplish (along with my parish) a way for girls to serve while not changing the practices we are taught. After all, even Paul said to be obedient to our leaders. There are some Antiochian churches with altar girls. I wouldn’t skip attending the Church because of that. The OCA, however, does not permit that - and I will abide by it.

I wouldn’t agree with ordination of women to the priesthood, though perhaps for different reasons than some Evangelical Protestant Churches reject women pastors (We still teach that women certainly cans preach, evangelize, be hospital chaplains, etc.

And yes - certainly, Jesus should be the primary focus for all. Everything should be about worship and faith in God and our Lord Jesus.

 

[FireDragon76]

Gurney, as a layman, the thing to do is to endure the errors of others with a sense of patience, knowing in time all things will work out for the good for those who love God. I don't think heresy hunting should be a layman's thing.

I get a twinge of that occasionally, but I honestly doubt it comes from God. I think it comes more from the Accuser who would rather see me without any church to go to at all. I experienced that a few years ago, a period of doubt and "backsliding" where I got cynical about everything and decided my church was just Christian LARP'ing. God showed me otherwise, and pointed me straight back to my church, to Pentecost of all times. I fell away so badly it convinced me to be a dedicated churchgoer and to stop judging the gift that came scratch and dent, but it was still a gift I did not deserve.

I had such a profound experience of God's presence on Pentecost that it really anchored me, that I needed to be more patient with people, and less arrogant and judgmental.

I have never really experienced that in the Orthodox Church, not like that. Not like being slapped upside the head with some experience I could not explain, other than the Holy Spirit falling on me that drove away something demonic. Perhaps others have, I am not judging your church in that regard. I've learned to be patient. I don't think there is a perfect church this side of Heaven, but God reaches us through broken means.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I think one of the others issues with the OP is that just because we don't adapt to modern culture the way Protestants do, does not mean we don't adapt to it. Thanksgiving has unique troparia and Kontakia, services in English, chant based on Appalachian music, tab collars and clergy shirts, Western pectoral crosses, etc. are all ways Orthodoxy is becoming uniquely American. yes, we still have work to do, but every aspect of our Holy Tradition is centered around Jesus and a personal relationship with Him. we just don't separate that from the Tradition and our communal relationship with Him.

 

[All4Christ]

I rarely disagree with my dear friend, All4, but in this I must---I will not ever accept this nonsense. It's hard to believe the Antiocheans would accept this. The altar boys share in a mystical way in the priest's priesthood when at the altar. They are a mystical extension, and really altar boys are supposed to find inspiration in their priest for a possible vocation. My own priest made that clear. I've heard it from other Orthodox clergy. The boys share in the role, and they (some) hopefully will find inspiration to seek some kind of ordination someday as a result. Girls could never do such a thing.

It isn’t something you will see at every Antiochian parish - and I’m not even sure if they do all the same things that are done by the altar boys. I do see your point though - and I won’t push for the OCA to change that.

Honestly, traditionally there shouldn’t be a large amount of altar boys serving at one time. The only people in the altar should be those that have a need, and the need can be served with just a few well-practiced boys or altar servers. It isn’t a right to be in the altar - and it isn’t just a way for boys to participate in the service; the altar is sacred. Yes, they hopefully find inspiration from it - but that is a secondary purpose. The primary one should be assisting the priest in making the Liturgy more seamless. (There also are situations where women can legitimately help in the altar, such as at monasteries. There isn’t inherently an absolute prohibition against women being in the altar. There is a prohibition about people being in the altar without a reason).

The main reason I see for the altar servers only being boys is that they are an extension of the subdeacon, a minor ordained order, which never had a female counterpart. The subdeacon is essentially an extension of the deacon, which is an extension of the bishop, a position which is never accessible to girls in Orthodoxy.

 

[FenderTL5]

I think one of the others issues with the OP is that just because we don't adapt to modern culture the way Protestants do, does not mean we don't adapt to it. Thanksgiving has unique troparia and Kontakia, services in English, chant based on Appalachian music, tab collars and clergy shirts, Western pectoral crosses, etc. are all ways Orthodoxy is becoming uniquely American. yes, we still have work to do, but every aspect of our Holy Tradition is centered around Jesus and a personal relationship with Him. we just don't separate that from the Tradition and our communal relationship with Him.

Agree.

The idea that;
over here is church and ----------------> over there is Christ doesn't make sense to me.
Christ is the head of the Church. We are members of the Body that is His Church.
To be 'In Christ' is to be in His Church.
I find the two inseparable.

 

[Erik Nelson]

I've found Orthodox traditions, as I've read as excerpts in commentaries, to be enlightening, insightful, and "anchoring". History is the high-lights & head-lines of yesterday. Church Traditions were the best Scriptural interpretations at the time. I'm not sure why some seem so quick to toss it all out as "dirty bath water" (so to speak).

 

[ArmyMatt]

Agree.

The idea that;
over here is church and ----------------> over there is Christ doesn't make sense to me.
Christ is the head of the Church. We are members of the Body that is His Church.
To be 'In Christ' is to be in His Church.
I find the two inseparable.

yep, Christ is the Head of the Body, the King of the Kingdom, and the Bridegroom of the Bride. Churchless Christianity is an oxymoron.

 

[FireDragon76]

I think one of the others issues with the OP is that just because we don't adapt to modern culture the way Protestants do, does not mean we don't adapt to it. Thanksgiving has unique troparia and Kontakia, services in English, chant based on Appalachian music, tab collars and clergy shirts, Western pectoral crosses, etc. are all ways Orthodoxy is becoming uniquely American. yes, we still have work to do, but every aspect of our Holy Tradition is centered around Jesus and a personal relationship with Him. we just don't separate that from the Tradition and our communal relationship with Him.

Lutherans also don't completely separate Jesus from our communal life together, but we also don't completely subsume Jesus into the community and its traditions. We would not want people to confuse the earthly institutions of the Church with the Kingdom of God, or the means of grace. This actually has to do with our Law-Gospel distinction that permeates our theology, which developed as a critique of the Papal system which saw itself as dominating the whole of Christendom. We emphasize primarily that Jesus reigns in our hearts by grace, but law governs civil society, including the institutions of the Church. We are critical of big institutions (and when we came to America, we departed from the state church model, and tended to become congregationally oriented).

 

[ArmyMatt]

Lutherans also don't completely separate Jesus from our communal life together, but we also don't completely subsume Jesus into the community and its traditions. We would not want people to confuse the earthly institutions of the Church with the Kingdom of God, or the means of grace. This actually has to do with our Law-Gospel distinction that permeates our theology, which developed as a critique of the Papal system which saw itself as dominating the whole of Christendom. We emphasize primarily that Jesus reigns in our hearts by grace, but law governs civil society, including the institutions of the Church. We are critical of big institutions (and when we came to America, we departed from the state church model, and tended to become congregationally oriented).

we don't subsume Him into the community and its traditions either. as God, He is above and beyond any comparison, contrast, or concept. and the Papal system did not impact our theology of the institution of the Church, since that was never our ecclesiology. we agree that Christ reigns in our hearts by grace, and the laws of the Church are not those of civil society.

 

[gzt]

The fullness of revelation in the person of Jesus Christ is the locus of our faith and Tradition is the life of the Holy Spirit in the Church who will lead us to all truth. As such, I'm not really afraid that the bishops will ultimately lead us astray, though there are historical blips where a lot of people go off the rails for a long time. So there's a little worry about things on a tactical scale but not on a strategic scale, for instance. So I'm not impressed when people get worried about "liberalism" infiltrating the Church. Especially when they wring their hands about things like women deacons - which are something the Church has had in the past! I think it does display a certain fear or lack of faith. What we actually end up doing is certainly ultimately at the hands of the bishops of the Church and I put my trust in them. Often it seems people have a much more rigid view than the conciliar church.

 

[FireDragon76]

I think the idea of tradition as a completely static thing, an abstract substance that was deposited in the past is more of a Catholic view of things. And it basically does require some infallible man or men to interpret it, otherwise you are left with the perpetual anxiety of having an abstract concept with no concrete referent.

 

[gzt]

Yes, it's certainly not just relegated to quoting from the same pile of books over and over.

 

[ArmyMatt]

yes, each generation has enriched and added to the faith. doctrine doesn't change, but the articulation, expression, and practice does. that's why it's so rich.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I think the idea of tradition as a completely static thing, an abstract substance that was deposited in the past is more of a Catholic view of things. And it basically does require some infallible man or men to interpret it, otherwise you are left with the perpetual anxiety of having an abstract concept with no concrete referent.

I'm curious why you say this is more Catholic? (If by that you mean in communion with Rome.) I ask because it is Catholicism that considers itself less constrained by the deposit of faith, it would seem.