Been a while since I've posted anything touching on Rome. The main reason being that the news from that quarter is almost invariably depressing. That said, I think this is worth a read.
HT: Fr. Z
ROCOR defrocks clergy who left for EP
6 hours ago
2 comments:
Lest we be deluded, this same zetgeist is now infiltrating our own Orthodox Church worldwide,
Worthwhile, indeed. My friend Archimandrite Gregory speaks the truth: we are not immune from the mistaken view of modernity critiqued by the author.
I came of age in the Roman Catholic "renewal" of the church during the scintillating Seventies. I was in a moderate religious order that was trying to hold onto some continuity without ignoring the documents+- of V II. The confusion, disillusionment, and loss of stability that accompanied that effort were real: If so many things that were true or were mortal sins are not true or mortal sins anymore, is anything reliably true or sinful now?There was clearly an effor from above to divide, disillusion, and destroy. For me, ultimately, it meant "depart."
I watched in the Episcopal Church (in which I sojourned before becoming Orthodox) as dialogue was used to wear people down until they were so weary of "listening to the stories of others" that they either abandoned objectivity or left. That Church became a parody of itself, proclaiming inclusivity while practicing exclusivity.
Modernity had become a value in and of itself. Yet, like the self-contradicting dogma that there "is no dogma," it is an inherently unstable. All times have been "modern." As soon as it appears, modernity is superceded and becomes the past; at any moment, all other moments are in the past, and the future is not yet here (if it ever will be!). When it arrives (for its brief moment), the future may in fact see us as hopelessly primitive, ridiculously naive, or unbearably arrogant in light of its own modernity.
Orthodoxy is not exactly comparable to Rome or Canterbury; nor are we bound, by fate, to follow after them. But neither are we, as an institution, impermeable to errors (think Arianism). The mentality described by the author is appearing within Orthodoxy; we have have our own advocates for "dialogue," and "listening" in the realm of faith and morals. Like those elsewhere, what they really mean is to "negotiate" on the basis of modernity for as much ground as they can gain, one inch at a time, never mind objective truth or sciences like biology.
If Orthodoxy is to flourish, it needs to face modernity with open eyes and ears, not merely cite the Fathers or claim that we are guided by the Holy Spirit (which, as a whole, we are), but test the spirits, including the spirit of the age, with eyes firmly fixed upon the Cross (because, yes, it must be experienced if we desire to experience the empty tomb), minds that "prefer nothing to Christ himself," (St. Benedict of Nursia), and hearts filled with the Spirit of God who is the same, yesterday, today, and for ever.
Orthodoxy has always been open to renewed ways of living and witnessing to the "faith once given" to the Apostles and Saints. Despite some Western accusations of theological morbidity, we have always had those who, guided by the Spirit, have interpreted truth to their contemporaries and, through them, to us. We are not a fossil; but we do sometimes talk or act as if were. Though each makes its contributions, no golden period of history, no single society, no chosen and annointed ethnicity defines us in an exclusive way.
We can't rest on our laurels and, once a year, proclaim the past triumphs of Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy must triumph now, in our lives. If we are servants of Christ, as we claim to be, then complacency will not serve us well. Let those who have eyes to see, and ears to hear, use them.
Post a Comment