We visited a Greek Orthodox church today, Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral in Portland, Oregon. My wife and I had been there before, years ago; but we thought we would go there with our kids to let them experience something like that. It was an interesting experience. There is definitely a sense of transcendence that Protestants often miss out on in their church services (which often emphasize the immanent or “closeness of God”); but I think that if Protestants, in general, go in an extreme in one direction, the “Orthodox” take it to the other extreme. It is a beautiful liturgy, with the smell of incense in the air, the Priests in their vestments engaging in chant and praise to our God, Jesus Christ. Unfortunately about 3/4 of the liturgy is in Greek; being able to read Koine Greek (which I can) and picking it up in chant in a liturgy are quite different things.
I think some of the more unfortunate things about the Greek Orthodox is that they are really Sectarian, that unless you have been chrismatized into their Church; received baptism and holy communion through their church; your salvation is non-existent. Further, while the Gospel is certainly spoken in the liturgy; it is not clear. If I were Orthodox, and I invited an “un-saved” friend to the Liturgy; he or she would not be able to understand or even truly “hear” the Gospel in a way that would make an impact on them in a “personal” way.
Our kids are really kind of too small to understand exactly what’s going on, but it did prompt some good discussion toward explaining differences between Protestants, Greek Orthodox, and Roman Catholics; they do understand that, at a basic level.
I think we stood out like a sore thumb. We didn’t “cross” ourselves throughout the liturgy — as the faithful do — we didn’t respond back to the Priest, because the Liturgy was hard to follow, and it was primarily in Greek; and of course we did not participate in Holy Communion, in fact we are not allowed to because we aren’t considered the “faithful.” Also, I brought my Greek New Testament with me; which nobody else in the church did, they don’t bring their Bibles to Liturgy (which is the saddest thing to me, I understand why they don’t, theologically). In fact towards the end of the Liturgy I had an older guy (he was Greek) question me about my Greek New Testament, which he saw sitting on my pew. He wanted to know what it was, I don’t think he understood why I had the Bible with me.
Anyway, an interesting experience; it makes me glad that I am “Reformed” in orientation, and that the Bible is something that I can take to church (should)!
Yeah, there are times I feel like a frankfurter at a ba mitzvah, in the church to which I belong, and occasionally lead adult Sunday School. Beginning today, I have a 4 Sunday, adult Sunday School leader slot. Understand this is a very small church, with a very very small adult class. My goal for the class is to explore the meaning of the Incarnation and the Mediation of Christ for us. I’m pretty novitient myself on this, but when talking about the Trinity, one of them says “we were discussing this in Sunday School some weeks ago [I was not present], whether there is one God or three Gods.” After Church, the regular Sunday School leader, talked presumably about the same discussion, “Yeah the other week we were discussing whether or not Jesus is God”. So, one of the things we did in class was go over the Athenasian creed. I don’t want to indoctrinate people per se. I want them to be able to think through The Faith themmselves. Even if they would accept it, the next guru would come along and pull up the crop and plant weeds. I’m not liturgical, but maybe thrice in the quarter, we recite the Nicene creed as this is a liturgical church: God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God, of one being with the Father, begotten not made…” Maybe not exact wording, that’s from memory. If these folks have been catechised, oughtn’t we be able to at least move forward from… And then since Jesus came down from Heaven, from the Father, another one says “If Jesus came from Heaven, maybe we all did? Could there be something to re-incarnation?”
Well, I’m venting. But if people either don’t understand, or don’t believe their own liturgy, why bother? On the upside, The Spirit will prevail, and I’m thankful to have a fairly blank canvass.
Wow, Duane. It sounds like you have a truly “evangelistic” mission before you, amazing!
We recited the Nicene creed at the Ortho church today; I think they do a much better job on this stuff (i.e. who Jesus is) than many many Prot. churches!
Yeah, it’s ironic. I guess probably the Lord has me where He wants me?!
I feel that, like any missionary or pastor, I myself need pastoral leadership. That’s kinda where you fit in Brother, although I haven’t asked you, and I’m not sure what that entails. I do frequently feel “out on a limb”.
Duane, it is good that those folks have you as a light in their midst π .
I’ll try to resource you any way that I can brother! I am glad that we have found each other in the ‘sphere’!
Btw, I’m praying for those folks you mentioned to me in email!
I appreciate you Bobby. Hopefully, after 100 pages, I have it drilled into my pointy little head that (to paraphrase) the consequence of integrating of man-centered wisdom with the Christian gospel
is the stripping of the power and wisdom found in the simple message of the cross. Eh? :O).
Yeah! If that isn’t poinant!
So I know much of what I’ve read in the 1st 100 pages or so of Incarnation applies to what I want to do in Sunday School. I just have to boil it down and tenderize it for general consumption.
Back to this blog, when I was a cemetary sales guy (6 years ago), we had Greek interments. I “enjoyed” the service. It was very reverent, and I liked the instruments: the incense burner and the incense, the chanting liturgy. Of the dearly departed “May his memory be eternal” is recited there, and again, periodically in the coming days and months.
Did they stand for the entire service?
@Duane, oh good, you read my thesis then? π
@Steve, how’d you know π ? Yep, pretty much the whole time . . . our kids just loved that π .
Bobby,
I’m a regular reader of Fr. Ernesto Obregon’s OrthoCuban blog. He’s an EO priest who frequents and occasionally writes for iMonk. I’ve picked up on bits and pieces of EO beliefs and practices over the years.
@Steve,
Oh yeah, I’ve stumbled across his blog a couple of times . . . cool π !
Bobby,
Ok, you’ve got my attention.
Of course given the how the Orthodox view creation, they donβt think they are going to an extreme. We aren’t one end of a spectrum.
Most parishes do the litrugy mostly in English with some Greek. At Cathedrals where there is a higher concentration of ethnic Greeks, the majority of the liturgy will be done in Greek. There usually in the pew one or two liturgy books with English on one side and Greek (with phonetic pronunciation!) on the other to make it easier to follow along. (Usually Green for the Hymnal and Brown for the liturgy alone without notes.) It usually takes about 3 liturgies to get the feel for it.
Koine wouldnβt have helped you much since the Liturgy is in 4th/5th century Byzantine Greek, which is entirely hysterical given the fact that the real ethnophileβs canβt read it and only modern Greek. The distance is about the same from Chaucer to modern English.
Practicing closed communion isnβt sectarian. The Reformed and Lutherans do it to some extent or another as well. If it is any consolation we donβt permit Catholics to partake either. Obviously this turns on what constitutes the church and what the conditions are for eucharistic participation. And given that the Orthodox arenβt a split of Rome or any protestant body, the charge of sectarianism seems to fall flat. After all, we arenβt a denomination.
As for the Gospel not being clear, I suppose that depends on what you take the Gospel to be and what the role of preaching is. If you stayed long enough, the sermon was probably after the liturgy was concluded. This is because the sermon was primarily to further the education of the newly baptized. This is not to say that our laity could not use plenty of adult instruction, but that usually takes place either before or after the liturgy. And for us, the Gospel isnβt a thirty second sound bite (or a hour long sermon in the OPC) and the liturgy is not an evangelistic tool per se.
Yup, you probably stood out like a sore thumb. Iβve seen plenty of visitors, usually a few weeks after our annual festival do the same. They donβt know when to turn, bow and such things and they look pretty waspy. No one of course will prevent you from bringing the scriptures to church, but since they are read out from the cantor stand (or from the priest in the gospel) it is kind of superfluous. It reinforces the idea that the Scriptures belong to the community and not any private individual. The lectionary for the weekly readings is readily available and members are encourage to read them during the week, though I’d bed money few do.
Should you visit another parish, it is usually helpful to contact the priest a week or so in advance and he can make (or should) things easier for you.
Hey Perry,
I was wondering if you might be lurking around π .
My “spectrum” point was just a general observation and sense that I was noting, from my perspective relative to my experience in “Evangelical” churches.
I would say the most of the body at this particular parish (or cathedral) is Greek. Yeah, we did look through the liturgy book; but still hard to follow if the uninitiated.
That is funny about the “Greek”. I don’t think the Orthodox closed communion parallels Prot. closed communions. Since from what I know of the Orthodox they simply close it because they don’t think a non-Orthodox is “saved.” The reason I know this is because, like I said, I had visited this parish years before — with my comparative religions class — and had a chance to talk with the Priest there. It was very informative, before we were about to leave I went and asked him about the rationale for their “closed” communion. I also asked him if he considered me a brother in Christ, based on my profession of faith in Christ; he said NO, he doesn’t! That’s Sectarian, I don’t care if you/they claim to be a denomination or not; you claim Christ, as do I — and Christ is not divided!
There were certainly things we appreciated during the liturgy. They did read the Gospel (the first chptr of Matt, the genealogy), and the sermon was on point (in English); it was about Immanuel (although it was only about 5 to 10 min.). I am not saying the “Gospel” wasn’t there, and indeed, there are many Reformed churches in the Prot. tradition who are even less clear about such things.
I’d say the only reason we stood out, is because we were new faces (although it is a rather large parish); but really, it was only because we didn’t know when to cross ourselves (although we wouldn’t anyway) — I think that was the most obvious.
Obviously, I have no problem with the idea that the scriptures belong to the community; of course I also believe in the priesthood of all believers (with all of the Protestant jive intact).
Thanks for the insight though, Perry. What was your background prior to Orthodoxy? Were you Protestant (Reformed)?
Bobby,
The Sith are always lurking around. π
Usually it is best to find a fixed point such as the epistle or gospel reading in the book and figure out where one is from there.
Since salvation in Orthodoxy is a process of recapitulation they think of being βsavedβ in a pen-ultimate sense. Second, we believe that the eucharist is the highest expression of the unity of the faith, not the lowest common denominator. Obviously we do not share the same faith. Further as I noted the Orthodox do not view themselves as a denomination, but just the church, full stop. Consequently, schism is a real possibility and at best Protestants are in schism and are heterodox. Consequently when one claims the name of Christ, which Christ are they claiming? Not the Christ of the Apostles and the Church.
Consequently, it was not sectarian to refuse communion to Novationists or Arians or any number of schismatic or heterodox groups. Youβre smart enough to know that there are deep seated differences between the Orthodox and the Reformed on Christology and the Trinity, not to mention the sacraments, scripture, and just about everything else. So while it is nothing personal mind you, I canβt see how there is some generic Christ out there that we all partake of. Either we are all wrong or some are wrong and some not. Or to put it another way, either the Spirit blew it or the Spirit inspires lies or the Spirit has lead the church into all truth.
As for schism from the church, I find it difficult to see how it is even possible on the view you seem to be articulating. In fact it seems, I could be mistaken, to imply not schism from the church, but within it. In which case, Christ is divided pace Paul, since as Augustine noted, Christ and his Church make up one whole Christ. Either that or there are many Christs.
Most sermons are about 10 min long, 15 tops. If the bishop comes, well its going to be longer, perhaps 30-45 mintues because well, the bishop can do what he likes as far as the sermon goes and no one is going to complain to the bishop about it. (They would complain to the priest mind you.)
As for crossing yourself that is fairly easy to remedy. The book has indicators, little sword looking crosses at the points in the text where one is to cross themselves (right to left).If in doubt, whenever the Trinity is mentioned or invoked or when a procession goes by.
As for my background, I was baptised Catholic, but raised Episcopalian in the Anglo-Catholic tradition. When I was a teenager and knew everything I joined a non-denom sect in So. Cal and was there for about four years. Then I was Reformed (REC). Then I moved back to an Anglican continuing body due to changes in my theology about the episcopate and baptism, and then in 2000 I was received into the Orthodox church with my wife. So that is about the first thirty years of my life.
Perry,
Yes, I know how the “Orthodox” view themselves; and then I know how I view the “Orthodox,” two separate realities. And the way that I, then, view the “Orthodox” is sectarian. They, you, aren’t THE CHURCH, “full stop;” from my perspective. Although, my view of “who” is “in” the Church and who isn’t is more expansive than yours; I would surmise that there are “some” who are in the “Church” and some not, in Eastern Orthodoxy, just as this is true across the continuum of Roman Catholics and Protestant denominations.
Sure the Spirit has lead the church into all truth, that doesn’t mean our knowledge of that isn’t fragmented though. My point with Christ not divided is just that. That all of “our” knowledge remains proximate and provisional; that doesn’t mean we know nothing, even to points of disagreement. But then again, we’re still talking about the same Jesus of Nazareth; and in fact the mechanics of how we work out the “implications” of the Jesus of the Bible — i.e. you’re Trinitarian as am I. Sure there are differences between the Reformed (and amongst) and EO, but I don’t take that as an all or nothing proposition relative to salvation. We’re all Trinitarian, and trying to articulate it the best we can. But you can continue to hold to your “all or nothing” perspective if that gives you some sort of comfort.
Thanks for the info on “crossing.”
And thanks for sharing your background, interesting. I grew up in So. Cal., wish I was still there! So you’re just a kid still, then π .
First, I love Orthodoxy! But even as an Anglican, and one friendly to the Orthodox.. there is much I don’t understand? There is an ethnicity problem, so many different Orthodox ethic classifications! At least for this Anglo-Irish. But then there was one Timothy Ware (English or Brit), who was a convert. And his book: The Orthodox Church should be read by every Western Christian intellect! It was revised twice I believe in the 90’s? And as Bulgakov said, “Orthodoxy does not persuade or try to compel; it charms and it attracts.” I certainly feel this! But, I too get lost somewhere? But again, Orthodox spirituality…theosis, penthos, ascesis, hesychasm, nous, metanoia… the list is profound. And the Prayer of the Heart!
But just where would the Church be without the Ecumenical Councils? Indeed, the Church is an ‘Orthodox Catholic Communion’!
Fr Robert,
See I don’t really have a problem with anything that you’ve said about the beauty reflected in “Orthodoxy;” but I do have a problem in the same vein as yours. The ethnic part of it is really exclusivistic, but not in the best sense of that word. I am an exclusivist, but relative to Christ; not one’s ethnographic background. Luther’s point is a good one, that salvation is not outside of Christ; but indeed it can be outside the “Church.”
And I should say, that I am for theosis as portrayed in Myk Habets book on Theosis in the Theology of Thomas Torrance. And it should also be noted that Torrance, as you know, made great in-roads with the Orthodox. The point to me is, no-one has exclusive claim on Christ; but vice-versa.
I believe the Church is an orthodox [c]atholic communion as well!
Bobby,
I get ya believe me! I have been shunned by some Orthodox myself, for seeking to “think” too Western, as they say. That sends me! But, I see that as just part of their ethos in some manner. Better that than looseness! But I undersatnd what you are saying. So far there are some real theological things too, that keep me from going fully Orthodox! Not sure I will ever resolve them? But, I still love them, and see them as perhaps the best overall theological examples of Apostolic Doctrine. But then, there is the question and position of Augustine for them. Something I have yet to figure fully? So I too have my so-called “issues”. π
Bobby,
Also John McGuckin’s book: The Orthodox Church: An Introduction, etc. is a fine book! I just wish more Evangelical types know more of the Orthodox history & theology. WE must have and need “Orthodoxy”, and especially now in the West!
Robert,
I need to read more on EO. I don’t know that I would say that I see them as the best “theological examples of Apostolic Doctrine” (I don’t know what you mean by that?), but I would say that there is definitely a sense of historical continuity that most other traditions don’t exemplify (even RC). Yet, to me, what’s more important — as far as continuity — is fidelity to the simple Gospel message. I think EO has theological problems when it comes to things as fundamental as salvation and anthropology (and imago Dei). I also reject the doctrine of Apostolic Succession and their view of the Church.
Anyway, someday I’ll have to check out that book; thanks.
Great to see more interest in the orthodox faith.. Great article.. and to the commenters-> stop fighting π
HI Anthony,
Perry started it π .
Bobby,
My statement about the Apostolic nature of Orthodoxy is both historical and theological. But as we know there is no perfection in the visible Church, and the true Church will always be a pilgrim body on earth. But, the Orthodox have simply kept faith overall! And to my mind, salvation is a mystery of God, and the factor of God’s theosis.. is that process of God’s life and grace itself, the Christian simply must be transformed! “Christ in you, the hope of glory (or glorification).” (Col. 1:27) Both Calvin and Luther would agree here I think. But I must admit, I am concerned over the more modern discontinuity of the Reformational & Reformed churches! In both the more liberal and even more ultra-conservative Reformed. Finally, the Gospel is hardly “simple”, but always profound.. the longer I live and sojourn! π
A Blessed Christmas!
Fr. Robert
PS..Bobby, I don’t want it sound like I am not critical of Orthodoxy either. For I like the man and ministry of Tertullian. A theologian of Christian antithesis! (See, Eric Osborn’s book: Tertullian, first theologian of the West.) I also value Origen. Henri de Lubac’s book: History and Spirit, The Understanding Of Scripture According To Origen is really grand!
Indeed the whole Church Catholic!
Amen, Fr. Robert.
Merry Christmas, brother!!
Bobby,
Even on your own principles, I canβt see how you can consistently label us sectarian given the closed communion of Reformation churches. If that is sufficient to show that we arenβt the church, then neither are any Reformation bodies.
We do not simply disagree over the scope or range of ecclesial membership, but over the very nature of the church.
Your gloss on the Spirit leading the church into all truth faces a few problems. First, my ignorance isnβt tantamount to a property had by the whole church. So my ignorance or lack of understanding is irrelevant when talking about judgments that the church has made. The part isnβt the whole. Second, you seem to be assuming that the churchβs teaching is something of a reconstructive process. Since this leaves all teaching on a provisional and revisable standing I find it to be inadequate to qualify as something that can bind the conscience. Such a project has more to do with humanism than the gospel.
Our individual lack of information or misunderstandings wouldnβt of themselves be sufficient to divide Christ. Claiming that there is real schism in the church would. The only way out is to deny that the visible church is the real church. That implies far too many errors in Christology to be a real option for me.
I donβt think weβre talking about the same Jesus. As Paul indicates there are many Jesusβ and many Spirits. (2 Cor 11:3-4) Protestants are only Trinitarian to the degree that their theology maps Orthodox triadolgy. And since it doesnβt map it well, it is a heterodox doctrine of God, just like Romeβs. So I simply deny the premise that there is some common core of essential doctrine that functions as common and neutral theological ground upon which we both sit. My perspective isnβt so much all or nothing, rather it is an endorsement of a kind of theoretical incommensurability. There is no neutral position from which to evaluate rival models. You seem to think there is but that seems to function as something of an unargued for premise rather than something for which youβre ready to provide a demonstration. The issue is entirely principled and comfort or not has nothing to do with it. The presence or lack of an argument for your position does seem quite relevant though.
I am now 39 and I am not sure if you take that to be a βkidβ or not. Where about in So Cal did you grow up?
@Perry,
Well, I’m not “Reformed” ecclesially; I’m free church (I grew up Baptist).
Yes, I realize that we disagree over the nature of the church itself; so I suppose you’re right, from your perspective I can see how Orthodoxy would not be “sectarian” since no one else is the Church to begin with. But, I’m looking at it from my perspective; because I hold that you could still be part of the Church of Christ.
Again, your whole articulation pivots upon your rather “brute” belief that your Orthodoxy is IT; and of course this is what I would contend is not the case (and obviously I am more willing than you to hold that there are “Orthodox” who are brethren when you do not consider me as such).
So yes, true, I am operating from an a priori assumption about what constitutes the “Church;” and I don’t plan on arguing for it here.
Never mind, your an old man then (my elder in fact). I grew up in the Long Beach area (Lakewood to be exact). Where was your time spent in So Cal?
Bobby,
I believe I already engaged the charge on your own principles. Free Church or Reformed makes no great differences to the lines of criticism Iβve deployed already. How is schism from the church even possible on such a view?
It is true that Iβve as yet given no detailed argument (and really, is a comment box sufficient space for such a thing?) to support my beliefs about the Orthodox church, but it seems a rather large leap from that to the way the belief is held by me is brute. It isnβt or at least I donβt think it is.
I think you realize as much when you write of your own position and I donβt think you take it as βbrute.β So I think charity demands that my adherence to such and so beliefs not be assumed to be brute either.
Eeewww, Lakewood. (Holds nose) ick. I lived safely behind the protection of the Orange Curtain all my life. (La Habra, Brea, Fullerton, Placentia, Garden Grove, & Anaheim.)
Your reaction to Lakewood is funny π . If it’s any consolation my mom now lives in Yorba Linda and she works in Brea. Now wait a second, I just scanned your list again; you do have Anacrime included π !
It’s more of schism of attitude. But you’re right, since my view of the Church has no real “physical” address then departure from a non-location (in that sense) becomes problematic.
Okay, I wasn’t playing nice . . . sorry . . . you’re not brute you simply have your view and I have mine; and yes, trying to argue such things (as the Triablougers are known for doing [online apologetics] — I only mention them here because I want to see if it gets me a mention on their site by Steve Hays, since last time I mentioned them “here” somehow their site-meter picked me up and got their notice π ) in the blogosphere becomes just, really, so much of a waste of time (it’s taken me awhile to learn that, Perry).
Happy New Year, brother!