Hi,

I’m new here…not sure it’s a good idea, but this thread caught my eye, and something about your comment motivated me to respond.

I don’t know what the ‘Byzantine Solution’ is, or what exactly the problem we’re having in America is either. One thing I do know as a scholar, though, is that the Byzantine Empire has a lot to teach us about how to be what we’re trying to be.

The Byzantine Empire was, and always understood itself to be, the Roman Empire. Though its borders no longer contained the Roman West after the fifth century, the idea of the ‘Byzantine’ empire is more or less the creation of modern historians in a post-Gibbon world. Byzantine Christianity, like Byzantine politics, was an entirely natural and organic continuation of Roman Christianity. Roman Orthodoxy, for a careful scholar, begins to look a lot like Byzantine Orthodoxy, and even modern Orthodoxy around the 4th Century. In this period, it was, profoundly, an Imperial religion.

For modern Americans that probably sounds like some kind of insult, but when one picks up the works of the great intellectuals of that Imperial religion (I’m thinking St. Basil, St. Gregory the Theologian, St. Athanasius here, among many others) one realizes that there is something important to be understood about their approach. In a world of total Empire, culture suddenly stops meaning anything at all…it becomes something that nobody ever thinks about. Nationalism disappears, for an empire is the sum of many nations. Ethnicity disappears, for an empire is populated by many peoples. In a world in which politics and power transcend nation and culture, nation and culture stop meaning very much. What is left to think about, for a thinker, is the Truth.

Imperial Orthodoxy, Roman Orthodoxy, Byzantine Orthodoxy were all expressions of the faith which existed without culture. Or, to be much more precise, without conscious culture, which is what we are fighting about here. They were forms of the faith lived out in a world in which the idea of a truth triumphant was possible – a world without borders in the minds of the empire’s citizens – a place where the next frontier only represented one more nation whose customs, politics, and religious traditions would soon become part of the greater whole, not merely by subjection, but by cooperation.

The Imperial solution is the Church beyond culture. For us here today, in what amounts for Orthodox faith to the far distant provinces, but which is at the same moment the capital of world power, this is not good news. It means that both sides are right, and so neither side can win. Much worse, it means that both sides are wrong, and so both will bicker and grow angry, quite justly, at the flaws of the other. We cannot create an Orthodoxy – we can’t make a Church, if we want it to possess the cultural freedom of the Church of the Empire. We can’t force the Church to be Greek or American, and we can’t sit still and just let it be. The Church beyond culture is what we are all longing for, and that will be a Church that is as American as souvlaki – foreign and yet so familiar, comfortable and yet out of place.

There is no solution…there is only us – we are here. We are the players and the thinkers, and the narrative will only look clean and complete when our grandchildren look back at what we chose to do. We cannot orchestrate these things.

We ARE the American Church – this is Americans being Orthodox, reaching forward, fighting things out, trying to be – trying to understand how this thing we have, this Truth, can belong to us – trying to translate it into the language of our own hearts. From history we must learn to forget time. From Empire we must learn to forget culture. If all of us can become the saints of tomorrow – if we drink great drafts of the truth and it bursts forth from us in light, then our children will look back and say ‘There was the American Church – there was Orthodoxy with a Detroit accent – look, the Truth can spring forth even from our culture!’ And they will be able to rest in a way that we cannot. But they too will need to translate and try and understand.

We are the St. Lukes (the evangelist). We are left scratching our heads, wondering how this thing that seems so obviously true can mean anything to us – how this faith which is only for Jews, which is followed by only Jews, can possibly mean something to a gentile. And our solutions will forever be as convoluted as the struggles of St. Paul, himself a Jew, as he wrote to the Romans (9&11). We will be reaching forward, KNOWING that Orthodoxy can be American, but never knowing exactly how until we see it in the rear-view mirror.

We all must begin by being citizens of the (Byzantine) Empire – by letting everything fall to the wayside which isn’t the Truth. Those ancient Imperials had the luxury of an Empire to help them hone their minds on what mattered. When culture is natural, never conscious, one need not wonder how the Truth can be expressed in that culture. When Greek or Latin is the universal language, one need not wonder when and how to translate the liturgy. One can worry only about what is True. We do not have such luxury. We have only ourselves and our prayers. But, through the Grace of God, we can return our minds to the Truth if we choose. And when that Truth grows in us and in our lives, that will be the very moment that it is perfectly expressed here, in this culture, and on this soil, just as effortlessly as it was for the ancient Imperials.

A tiny fraction of Orthodoxy worldwide is infected by certain politically correct and secularist tendencies. These ‘innovations’ are introduced by powerful and wealthy pseudo-Orthodox individuals. They do not even have a basic understanding of the universal Orthodox Tradition. When one worships money then he can easily believe that everything, Church included, is for sale.

The devil is a good strategist. He attacks not only from without (Fascism, Communism, Freudism, feminism, modernism, and so on) but also from within. He is playing on our weaknesses and most of all on our ignorance. Most of all on our ignorance! Ignorance is the biggest threat, heavily exploited by the evil-doers.

I’ve been contemplating the parable of the wheat and the tares lately. We cannot expect to have all wheat, there will be weeds. We need to be prudent as Elliot says, but we do need to expand the field so to speak or rather take the fences down between our fields.

When the Church is adaptive, saints are the fruit.

Andrew, thanks for alerting us to this poll. Looks like it’s three to one against. This is yet more evidence that the Phanariote view of American Orthodoxy is no longer working. In taking a gander at The National Herald, I couldn’t help but notice that Kalmoukos’ reportage of the inner workings of the GOA shows it to be a Potemkin village. What astounded me was that at the Clergy-Laity Congress of 2008 in Atlanta, only 150 delegates were there. In the past, there were usually at least 1,200. If true, this is one of the bitter fruits of the great patriarchal charter controversy in which the laity were driven out of meaningful church administration.

Dn. Eric,

You wrote:

“But, I ask that you not condemn me for the lack of a beard of substance, my preference for one hour-fifteen minute liturgies, the need to have a pew in front of me so I can sit down when I am bored, my dislike for wearing a dress even though I am ordained and my aversion to hats.”

If you are backing away from your previously stated preference for short liturgies, then I’m encouraged.

As for tones, languages and architecture, I agree totally. I have no objection whatsoever to creating an 8 tone system based on familiar American patterns, or on the Western modes (Ionic, Aeolian, Dorian, etc.). I just think you’re changing the subject. Those things that have largely remained the same throughout the Orthodox cultures over the centuries up until the twentieth should remain as they have been. Innovation away from those common elements is the Protestantization I was referring to.

An Athonite monk came to visit my old parish a few times. He was having his pacemaker adjusted by a doctor in a nearby city. The first time he visited, the priest was visibly worried about what he would think of the church. Of course we had an iconostasis, but no icons on the walls. We had pews and the genders mixed and there was not a covered female head at any of our services.

The priest was worried the monk would take one look, think he was in a Protestant church and turn around and leave. Luckily he was quite polite. There were some food issues but that was about it. Of course, I may have missed something since he didn’t speak English.

Everyone, on some level, knows how far we have fallen. It’s just that they’ve gotten used to it and can’t bear the thought of returning to what they once were.

Yes, you are right we don’t have much of a disagreement on the state of American Orthodoxy.
All I’m advocating is prudence. Orthodoxy cannot blossom while taking roots. The danger of overgrown weeds is quite real.

I do not understand why you automatically equate “acclimating to America” with obliterating Orthodox tradition and practice.

Don’t you think the Syriac monks might have made that same argument before heading to Greece…and evangelising the Greeks? Or the Byzantines, before sending missionaries to Russia?

I’m sorry…but I reject the idea that “acclimating to American culture” automatically means “Protestantizing” – the two are not synonymous in my book.

When I listen to Rachmaninoff vespers, or hymns by Tchaikovsky, or Georgian hymns or even those in use in Kenya now – I am amazed at what the Holy Spirit did once those countries were evangelized. Are we so different in America? And how many of those saints that you want to emulate came FROM those countries – to which Orthodox Christianity also “acclimated”?

Frankly, speaking as an American, and given the complete hodgepodge of practices currently in existence in America (pews,no pews, organs, no organs, new calendar, old calendar, fasting rules which range from no fasting at all to fasting and confession before every communion) – I’m more inclined to say “Why don’t you Orthodox get your act together first…then you can lecture us (Americans) if we want to change it!” But in order to have that conversation – there must be a consistent STANDARD – which currently does NOT exist. I actually had a Greek bishop tell me one time that he continued to use Greek because it was the only standard service that he had – all the English versions were different! To which I thought (but uncharacteristically did not say), “Yeah..and whose fault is that?”

I know that sounds harsh – but given the reality “on the ground” in America, I think it’s accurate – which is why I’ve ALWAYS supported Orthodox unity in America – with “unity” defined as “locally elected bishops, sitting in synod”. That is the ONLY way we will ever move to consistent practices. And like another bishop, one that I admire, said, “Dean – if we don’t unite in this country, twenty five years from now – we are not going to have 15 different “jurisdictions” – we are going to have 15 different “denominations”…each with their own, quaint eastern practices.” I think that is the bigger issue here.

Finally, your choice of hymns is interesting to me…I grew up singing both of them in a GOA church…IN the junior choir. The second one was always a favorite of mine.

Unfortunately, we sang them in Greek – which I will be the first to say is breathtakingly beautiful – but it took my leaving and going to an OCA parish before I had any appreciation of WHAT it was I had been singing for 40 years. I mention this because this story represents the result of “not acclimating”. I have guys in my parish who converted 5 years ago, and know more of the hymnology (and therefore “theology”) than i do…me, a 33 generation Orthodox. Is that what you want more of? I’ve had people in my old Greek church, on the feast day of the Dormition, wonder out loud “which icon is he talking about?” because the icons were all in Greek.

I guess the bottom line is “what is the definition of acclimate”? My definition would be to do exactly what we did in Russia, the Balkans, and what the Russians did in Alaska – adapting the hymns and liturgy to the local culture…so that Orthodoxy can take root and blossom there…and so that the participants do not feel like foreigners in their own church.

It would appear to me that all of the things you are worried about, have a lot more to do with a lack of a consistent standard, in which case I’d suggest you get behind my definition of Orthodox unity in this country. Until we have a real synod of bishops, locally elected and working as a synod – we will NEVER be in a position to address the concerns I have heard you express.

Hope that helps. To be honest, I doubt you and I have much of a disagreement on any of this.

Best Regards,
Dean

I take issue with the “acclimating to America” thing. To emulate the saints … that would be something! We are very spoiled children constantly complaining about how uncomfortable this and that makes us. How long worship services are, how exhausting the fasts… BTW, did you know that more than half a year are fasting days?

I thank God for the saintly men and women of every age. Through their lives of constant struggle, penance, sacrifice and martyrdom they preserved the faith such that I found it here when I came to my senses.

A time will come when we’ll understand much more and say “I was so stupid, so lazy, what was I doing?” It might be too late… May the Lord have mercy on us!

Regarding the preservation of the language of the Old Country issue: where can I find these:

O Trisagios Ymnos – The Thrice Holy Hymn (Mount Athos Version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BpBgU-gUMA&feature=related

O Virgin Pure-Orthodox Byantine Chant
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkqZbFQb0O0&feature=related

in English version? Something similar at least?

Dear Scott,

I have often wondered what the Greeks said when word first reached them that the sacred dome of the Byzantine Church now looks like an onion in the barbaric land of Russia.

And those Russians, lacking any ability to create beauty, invited the Italians to paint their frescoes, compose their music and cover their iconography with metal covers.

While these were innovations of their day, they became, and are a valid expression of the Russian Church.

I do not know if you have ever visited Alaska, but the Orthodox Faith, which has existed there for over 200 years, has found a native expression in its worship, music and liturgical customs. There is even an eight tone system of hymnography that is unique to Alaska — again a valid expression of our Orthodox Faith.

Unfortunately, due to many different historical circumstances, our expression of faith in America has been stuck in an old county redux. We are in no way becoming Protestant by finding and discovering an American expression of our faith in America. I have heard the Cherubic Hymn set to many different melodies, so what (shudder) would be wrong with an Aaron Copland melody?

While this may be in the extreme, I think that we are already making the transition to an American expression — if you have ever visited any OCA parishes, you will see that the worship is quite different than your tradition Russian of Greek services. And as far as the 1 1/4 hour liturgy, I worship at the chapel of the OCA Chancery — we do not cut anything from the liturgy, the priest preaches for about 15 minutes, we have choir of about 6-8 people that sing everything quite simply and beautifully, the 20 people in attendance all take communion and yes we are done in a reasonable amount of time. While I have always said that the liturgy is part theater, there is no reason that it has to be done in such an elaborate manner if there is no major reason fro celebration or anniversary. I also do not want to reduce the worship to Sunday — Vespers are held before each feast last about 35 minutes, and morning liturgies are held for lesser feast days at 7:00 am.

I grew up in a church where the “real” liturgy was in Slavonic, and the pro-liturgy (obednitsa) was in English — kinda like Orthodoxy lite for the white boys — all those American guys that married our Russian girls after the war. I get the impression that this is where a number of parishes in the GOA still exists; if it is in English it is OK to look and act Protestant since it is not the real church. Fortunately, the majority of the OCA parishes are light years ahead of where our church was 40 years ago. We are and have been moving towards an American expression — it’s just my opinion and my aggressive nature that we are just not moving fast enough to capture the searching people of this great land.

And, Scott, if you met me, you would see I am about as Orthodox as they come — I just happen to be a white boy!

-Deacon Eric

Dn. Eric,

Ignore the last paragraph of my post above. From the attitude I sensed you might be in GOARCH but I looked back at your article and see that you are OCA.

Dn. Eric,

In precisely what sense are putting pews and/or organs in our churches, having women not cover their heads, shortening services (yes, you are advocating this if you talk about “pulling off” an hour and fifteen minute liturgy), etc., “adapting that which is redeemable in the culture to the Christian way of life”? – – especially considering that pewless churches, womens headcovering, etc. are not only the traditional practice but have crossed cultures for many centuries. What you are doing in reality is adapting Orthodoxy to modern American Protestant (and Catholic) practice. There is no need to adopt modernist practices since they conflict with orthopraxis as it has existed internationally for a very long time. Orthodoxy changed the way that the Greeks, Russians, Romanians, Syrians, Palestinians, etc. worshipped.

It’s nothing more than a rationalization for incoporating heterodox practices which, sooner or later, will affect orthodox belief. The motivations are 1) not wanting to be classified as an old fashioned stick in the mud but as a dynamic innovator (i.e., being loved by the right people) and 2) crass pursuit of market share regardless of the quality of product.

But, have it your way. If you’re in GOARCH, the bishops wouldn’t tolerate traditional worship anyway.

Dear Elliot,

I didn’t for a moment mean to neglect, exclude or slight the saints – which is why I mentioned St. Photios and St. John Chrysostom in my comment – our job is to 1.) understand them and 2.) emulate them.

The problem, in my mind, is that most of us have a very poor appreciation of history – which in turn leaves them wide open to a bastardization of that history by people (hierarchs included) with an agenda. they simply have no basis for discerning the truth.

For example – it was a personal epiphany when I realized, thru the reading of history, that for all the attachment to and emphasis on Greek in this country – our Church, St. Photios in particular, had decided to send Sts Cyril and Methodios to the Slavs in the ninth century. Later, reading about the two brothers’ disputes with the Trilingualists in Rome, I was struck by what this implied…

Here we are…1000 years later in America…attempting to preserve (at the cost of thousands of souls) the language of the Old Country – when the most brilliant patriarch to ever occupy that throne had settled the issue 1000 years earlier – deciding to send the brothers to Moravia with a new alphabet with the natural result of using the local language…1000 years ago!

It is part of our responsibility, as Orthodox laity, to learn these things, and, once learning them, insist on a continuation of these practices…whether that means talking to other laity, the local priest, or informing the local bishop or patriarch. It makes absolutely no difference whether the guy wears gym shoes or an episcopal crown.

And I could not agree more – reading about the lives of the saints is a GREAT place to start!

BTW – People in this country might want to pay particular attention to St. Raphael of Brooklyn…who was under censure at one time by three of the four of the ancient patriarchates for supporting the return of the Antiochene patriarchal throne to local (ie non Greek) control.

Best Regards,
Dean

Well said Harry. You hit the nail on the head.

John, the intellectual laziness of Dn Hanley’s piece is the offspring of the historical ignorance that I am forced to believe is being taught at HC. The overall picture I get is that education there has been reduced to pietistic propaganda + lack of critical analysis. (If anybody can prove me wrong, I will gladly revise my critique.)