Greetings!

Just got a link to this on FB; a good article, one I hadn’t read in a while. I’d just like to comment (late to the party though I may be) on Fr. Hans’ tent-maker comment.

I think that, ideally, a priest should be full time, especially if one is developing a mission or a small church. Anyone who’s worked to develop their own business will tell you that you’re looking at 55-60 hours a week on average just working. A parish has much that needs tending to, and if a priest is working 30-40 hours, AND has a parish, AND has a wife and kids (!)…something’s got to give.

I can see a parish providing a half-salary wage for the priest, and the priest could make up the rest (or perhaps the Matushka, though that would need to be HER choice, in a job she WANTS to devote herself to via her education, etc). If the job requires lots of work outside the office, that’s bad. Teaching comes to mind. Michael’s comment about self-employment is even trickier, because unless someone is already established in some sort of field and already has a clientele when starting at a parish, developing that kind of business takes months, and you’re basically putting those 55-60 hours a week into THAT, and the Church (not to mention your family) gets what’s left. On the other hand, if it’s something like, say, Starbucks, where 20 hours a week gets you something to take home plus GREAT medical/dental/vision insurance, and you can leave that work at work, then that’s better. A great part-time situation can give a mission priest the security he needs to grow the mission slowly; an involved, full-time job can suck the life out of a parish priest and, by extension, the parish.

It all depends on the cost of living where the church is, what kind of jobs are available, and what the needs of the parish are. St. Paul’s question to the Corinthians — “If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we reap material things from you?” (1 Cor. 9.11, but read vv. 4-11) — should be considered deeply by the parish; the people of God need to really ask themselves if what they’re receiving on Sundays (and hopefully throughout the week) is really worth something to them, and if so, what can they do to support that?

Along with that, the priest should say, “Here is my plan for ministry; we will have services at x times during the week, pastoral visits will be these days, classes will be on x and x evenings, I will be doing this, this, and this for attempts to get the word out about us in the community during the week, etc.” The priest needs to show transparency in what he will be doing to honor the gifts of the people of God so that the people know the answer to that question most priests hate: “What do you *do* all week, anyway, Father?”

Your were fortunate to see Fr. John when he was still in Prescott. He proves what a good priest can do with and in a parish.

Who has spoken up in their communities? I’m interested to know of all our ethnic friends on the internet who “talk a good fight” on the internet and forums, have they made it known to their communities, their Bishops that they won’t stand for nationalism?

Has anyone passed this essay on to their local Ethnic Bishop?

It’s time we speak up, and take responsibility and be accountable for the Diocese we leave for our kids. And the change from our Bishops is few and far between.

Dear Fr Peter,

Correction – we need more courageous clergy AND laity “who are not afraid to say what needs to be said.”

Personally, i’ve been in many situations where the clergy simply CANNOT say what needs to be said…the retribution would simply be too great. As I told one priest, “Father, you stay out of this…you have two kids in college, and if you’re not careful, you’ll be the next priest at Iron Mountain Michigan..let us take care of this.” You can imagine the response I grateful response I received.

In an earlier life, as a more active member of OCL (and webmaster of their site) i was emailed by priests from all over the country, asking for my discretion, but telling me “please don’t ever stop! bless you!” The names were never disclosed, but would shock many.

best regards,
dean

The objection I think is not so much to “ethnic” culture, but rather to nationalism, mistakenly spoken of as “ethnic” culture. Ethnic culture often expressed in dance, folk music, song, poetry, history, etc., is often a very beautiful thing in which and through which we can experience a bit of the divine. The problem arises, I think, when ethnicity is wrapped in the flag of a nation and proclaimed to be superior to other cultures/peoples/nations and indispensible to the evangelizing and living of Orthodoxy in another country. Some have observed that Orthodoxy seeks elements within culture to baptize – transfigures certain elements to remain within the experience of Orthodox Christians in this new place and discarding other elements as opposed to the Gospel; I agree with this. However, I would submit for consideration the following – the more time, effort and energy we expend attempting to keep a foreign culture afloat in a place within which it is alien (though some may not want to admit it, as soon as a “culture” is transported from its natural context, it is changed and to some measure, no longer the same “culture”), is time, effort and energy we loose working to be agents of transfiguration within our own culture.

You are right. the problem isn’t ethnic traditions, it is more the failure of “ethnic” orthodox and converts both to recognize that everyone is from an ethnic culture, even white Anglo Saxon protestants. Myself, I come from a rural Irish and German cultural tradition. I have students who, when asked to identify their ethnicity, say they don’t have one. The Orthodox are proud to say that they baptize the good things in the cultures they evangelize. This seems to be hard to do in America when so many people are completely unaware that they have cultural and ethnic traditions. I think this is why so many converts fall in love with the traditional ethnic culture of the parish or jurisdiction they own and try to fit into that culture. Somehow we need to take the next step of making the culture and traditions of us converts Orthodox instead of making converts Russian or Greek or Arab. I think we converts need to take the lead in this, but we surely need the help of cradle Orthodox to figure out what in our native culture is, or can be made, Orthodox and what needs to be changed. This is what the Ethnic orthodox and the people who evangelized them had to do a long time ago.

Having said that, there are still those of us who belong to an Orthodox ethnic tradition. In the Orthodox World (the geographic areas which are primarily populated by Orthodox Christians), our faith is tied to the culture. The Orthodox Church is understood as being the basis of ethics, culture, and the traditional worldview of those societies. This is a hard fact to be excepted by American people reacting to inhospitable behavior by some ethnic Orthodox (some groups more than others). It is a fact that we often react with vigor to injustices which we experience. Our speech often dwells on the immediate problems we face.

Overall, I would agree with Fr. John’s article. It illustrates the proper movement of the Church: the movement towards an organic Church entity growing in this North American soil. However, there is a certain spirit, a certain hyper-focus that has emerged amongst Orthodox clergy and laity on the internet over the past 5 to 10 years. We are very focused on the issue of ethnicity getting in the way of the Church’s mission. I will be the first to say that nothing should be allowed to hamper the development of the Church, of which the reception of converts is a vital component. No ethnic tradition should be allowed to become an anchor. But the question I pose is a new one: Do ethnic traditions actually hamper the Church?

My answer is no. First, the Tradition of the Church is to receive converts. The Tradition of the Church is to be hospitable and non-Phyletistic. The things which cause inhospitality are not traditions of the Church, and certainly not ethnic traditions. The things which hamper the Church’s progress and mission have nothing to do with the old country, or with festivals, or Slavonic, or Koine Greek. The things which hamper the Church’s progress and mission are errors on the part of individuals: laypeople who are not outgoing in their treatment of visitors, hierarchs who do not respond to local issues, parishes that focus more on social events than salvation and the proclamation of the Gospel.

Secondly, Phyletism must be correctly understood. As of late, American Orthodox (both those of ethnic Orthodox descent as well as converts) are quick to call anything ethnic “Phyletism” and thus heretical. Heresy is a heavy charge to lay, and one should be careful before throwing that label around with such carelessness.

The fact of the matter is, that those of us who celebrate an ethnic tradition hold Orthodoxy dear to us. It is indeed so dear to us, that we allow it to be our culture, our identity. Another fact is that we do not live in an Orthodox society. It is true that there are many converts to the faith in this country, and they are no less Orthodox than any Russian or Greek. But the mainstream society in this land is not Orthodox. This is a fact. The popular culture is at best Protestant (perhaps specifically Calvinistic) and at worst it is Post-Modern and Nihilistic. For those of us fortunate enough to be born into a Russian or Greek Orthodox family, it seems the proper reaction would be to celebrate (and live) that culture versus the alternative.

All I would ask of Orthodox Christians who do not belong to an ethnic tradition is this: I never forced you to learn Slavonic or Koine Greek, I do not ask you to become Russian or Greek as a prerequisite to conversion; please don’t try and force me to give up my culture, my ORTHODOX heritage, that brought Orthodoxy here and shared it with you in the first place; the culture that shaped my Orthodox worldview and taught me to celebrate the traditions of the Church. In the meantime, I will do all I can to catechize the converts in this land, and to assist the Church so that Orthodox Christianity is something indigenous (local) and not perceived as something distant and unattainable. Orthodoxy must be something that responds to this society and these people, whatever their background. This is the way Orthodoxy always was, and will be. Anything less is heterodox.

Perhaps my words have offended some of you, and for that I am sorry, it was not my intention. But one thing is for sure, Orthodoxy is indeed foreign to this culture. If we truly want to establish a local Church, one jurisdiction in America, we need to admit that this culture is not Orthodox, and that our mission to spread Christ’s Gospel hinges on this fact. Please do not despise those of us who celebrate an ethnic tradition, we are only preserving an Orthodox culture in which to live, one that we were blessed with at birth, not to our own credit.

Hopefully, in time, an Orthodox culture will be established here. Centuries from now our posterity will look back at the various American saints and theologians, the councils, the conversions, the building of churches and cathedrals, the propagation of Christ’s Church throughout the world. There will be an American Orthodox tradition, just like there is already a centuries old Russian Orthodox tradition, a Greek Orthodox tradition, a Serbian Orthodox tradition, and the list goes on. When that day comes, should people in other lands who receive American Orthodox missionaries and immigrants despise their tradition and force them give it up? No. They should remember the past and celebrate it. They should look to their ancestors in the faith for guidance and learn from their lessons, just as St. Sergi of Radonezh or St. Sava or St. Nino (saints who never set foot in America) are revered by American Orthodox converts. They should seek to live an Orthodox lifestyle, within an Orthodox culture. That is all that we “ethnic” Orthodox seek after.

Ok, the is a good distinction. Thanks for the clarification. You really can’t serve two masters.