The Implications of the Convert Surge in American Orthodoxy

Orthodox Church Pews Are Overflowing With Converts

And the New York Times is not happy.

Heaven Forbid

Heaven Forbid over at Gabriel Sanchez's blog is a good read. It contains some pointed criticisms of Orthodoxy, especially American Orthodoxy, with which I really can't disagree. At least not very strongly. Orthodoxy is balkanized with all sorts of confusion on various, usually pastoral, issues. In too many cases it still has the unfortunate odor of being an ethnic social club. But on the upside, blatant heresy is not commonly preached in its churches. This is sadly not the case in the Roman Catholic Church.

From time to time I get emails from people thinking of swimming the Bosporus in the hopes of escaping the crisis (is there anyone who can seriously deny the existence of a major crisis?) in the Roman Catholic Church. My advice is to take a deep breath. Too many are looking for some mythical slightly Byzantine version of the pre-Vatican II RCC with great liturgy but without a Communist and almost certainly heretical Pope. That is not what we are.

We have many of the same problems that Catholics do, and a few that are kinda unique to us. Corrupt clergy, poisonous church politics, in some cases an unwillingness by clergy to preach an uncompromising position on some of the hot button issues of the modern age, and the pervasive issue of ethnophyletism. But as Gabriel noted, overt heresy is not (usually) on the menu, though I have been seeing a few worrying signs.

All of which brings us back to the great aphorism that the grass is always greener over the septic tank.

Does this mean I don't want Catholics (or anyone else) to convert? No! I want EVERYONE to become Orthodox. But I want them to do it for the right reasons and with their eyes wide open. It took me 25 years before I finally took the plunge. In my ten years in the Church I have made a few observations about converts. Only about half are still Orthodox after three years. And that is a serious problem because apostasy is much worse than schism or heresy. It is far better that you stay outside the Church than join, only to leave later on.

Beyond which, see this post.

OCA Holy Synod issues Preliminary Response to canonical restructuring proposals

A Preliminary Response of the Holy Synod of Bishops of the Orthodox Church in America to proposals with regard to canonical restructuring, a topic of discussion at the fifth meeting of the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of the United States of America in Dallas, TX September 15-19, 2014, was issued and distributed to all bishops on September 17.

The text of the Preliminary Response reads as follows.

Read the rest here.

Important: ROCOR says 'No' to efforts to restore canonical order in N. America

Not particularly surprising, but still disappointing. Read the details here.

Church Discipline and Pastoral Practice

Over at Byzantine Texas there is a post up on recent developments in the Orthodox Church here in N. America that in my opinion is worth taking note of.  See here.  The problem of often sharply differing disciplines on a wide range of pastoral subjects is one of the byproducts of our balkanized jurisdictionalism here in the United States and Canada.  I don't obsess over uniformity the way Catholics tend to.  But the degree of divergence in practice, and the abuses that the current system is susceptible to, are a legitimate problem.  If they accomplish little else, the Bishop's Assembly will have done a great service for the church if they can get that mess under some sort of control.

Our Lady of Kazan and American Pluralism

The icon of Our Lady of Kazan (also known as the Black Virgin of Kazan) is one of the most famous in Russian Orthodoxy. One of the Virgin’s two feast days coincides with the Day of National Unity. This is appropriate. Kazan occupies an important place in Russian history. Its conquest and destruction in 1552 eliminated the last stronghold of Mongol power in what since then has been southern Russia. The Mongols of that region, descended from the mighty Golden Horde, had long before converted to Islam. Thus the conquest of Kazan (which was followed by a massacre of its civilian population) is also a highly symbolic marker of the conflict between Orthodox Christianity and Islam, which still reverberates today along the southern perimeter of the former Soviet Union. The association of the Virgin with national unity is symbolic as well. It evokes the so-called sinfonia—the close unity of church and state—which characterized Russia from the beginning of its national history to the Bolshevik revolution. It would be an exaggeration to say that the Putin regime has once again established Orthodoxy as the state religion, but it has come close to doing so. Thus Our Lady of Kazan again bestows legitimacy on the Russian state, including its foreign policy, which has been supported by the Patriarchate of Moscow. The state in turn has supported the policy of the Patriarchate to re-assert its authority over previously independent Russian Orthodox churches abroad. The long shadow of the Black Virgin has extended to America.

According to the Atlas of Global Christianity (a very useful source, edited by Todd Johnson and Kenneth Ross, and published in 2009), there are 6,200,000 Orthodox Christians in the United States. This figure has been challenged. If it holds, the number of Orthodox is more than Episcopalians, still regarded in the media and public awareness as an important denomination, and roughly comparable to the number of Jews, whose cultural influence has been enormously larger. (Can one imagine speaking of the role of Orthodox Christians in Hollywood? Or in American humor?) Despite its place in the religious demography of America, Orthodoxy is still widely perceived as marginal and exotic. I don’t know just when Orthodox priests, with their black robes and elongated black hats, first appeared with Protestant, Catholic and Jewish clergy at important national ceremonies such as presidential inaugurations. But it would be a mistake to deduce from this some great political or cultural influence.

The explanation of this paradox is simple. It is what one may call the ethnic captivity of Orthodox Christianity in America.

Read the rest here.

Utah Meeting Seeks to Unify Orthodox Christians

SALT LAKE CITY (RNS) If a group of Orthodox Christians meeting in Salt Lake City this week (Oct. 14-16) has its way, future generations of Greek, Serbian, Russian and other ethnic faithful all will worship together in a single American church.

A unified church would "honor and celebrate the multicultural Orthodox community here," says Bill Souvall, president of the group Orthodox Christian Laity. "It would give us a powerful presence in America. Spiritual seekers and searchers would find us."

There currently are 14 Orthodox jurisdictions in America, and each has its own bishop in the country of origin and its own language, but the liturgy and doctrines are the same, Souvall says. "The churches of America should be American. They shouldn't have all these separate archdioceses."

Even so, this push for unity is not universally accepted.

Some bishops who look to Europe for leadership are not eager to displease their superiors, Souvall said. Older members also worry about losing their language, culture, identity and ties to their home countries.

Read the rest here.

The American Orthodox Census

Josephus has the scoop. This represents the first attempt at a serious census of the numbers and demographics of Orthodoxy in America. Bottom line the entirety of the Orthodox faithful is a bit less than half that of the Episcopal Organization. The Greek Archdiocese is by far the largest in terms of numbers with the OCA in second, although the OCA has a significantly higher percentage of regular attendees as a percentage of their total membership. On a side note these numbers also include the non-Chalcedonian Churches and two schismatic Orthodox groups.

An interesting post on a really boring topic

OK. Let's be honest. In the grand scheme of Orthoblogdom the topic of church administration, (unless we are talking about a scandal) is about as exciting as watching a championship chess match on payperview. And if we are talking about the much discussed Episcopal Assembly and a potential future American Orthodox Church (AOC) we would all much rather expound on why America is not mature and ready for it's own church. And why it's better that we remain under ethnic churches until we get a better grasp of real Orthodoxy and purge all of the Protestant baggage from recent converts. Never mind that as long as we are taking converts that will be a never ending battle (presuming the problem is in fact as bad as some claim). And of course totally ignoring the fact that our current ecclesiological structure here is absolutely non-canonical and that the state of the Orthodox Church in N. America is and will perpetually be one of open scandal until we put an end to the multiplicity of jurisdictions here.

But I digress.

A really important but deathly boring topic relevant to any future AOC is church administration. I am talking about the nuts and bolts of making it work. Yea yea yea, I know. Can't we just get on with a fun debate about how Catholics are really heretics and just how far the Anglicans have fallen? But this is actually an important topic. So bear with me please.

There is a new website (blog?) up called Suggestions For the Episcopal Assembly. (Hat Tip: Byzantine Texas) It's not really clear who is running it other than that it is not an official site. But I like the concept. It is a venue for constructive suggestions on how to get a future AOC up and running. The EA hopes to present some sort of viable plan to sort out our jurisdictional chaos for the consideration of the Great and Holy Synod that has been on the drawing boards for about a century now.

Which brings me to the very first post. And it is an impressive one at that. The author presents a fairly detailed suggestion for how we can carve up the United States (sans Canada) into Eparchs with each one containing multiple dioceses. He suggests that the Eparchs roughly correspond to the ten Administrative Regions used by the Federal Government. You can read the details of his (or her) suggestion here.

Are there some issues? Yes of course. But after reading the suggestion several times, I think the author has actually come up with a plan that could serve as the basis or framework if you will, for organizing the AOC into viable dioceses and lay the groundwork for a national Holy Synod.

Please leave your comments on the original post.

A Challenging Vision For Orthodox Christians in America: An Interview With Father John Meyendorff

A.N.: At this time what does this new situation imply culturally and sociologically, in particular for those communities throughout the world, notably in the countries not traditionally Orthodox, and for their witness? What is the future for these young communities?

F.J.: Their future and their mission are to witness to Orthodoxy in an atmosphere of dialog, apart from wholly participating in the development of the life of the countries, of societies, in the intellectual world in which they are developing.

I would underline however that there exists a certain problem in the midst of Orthodoxy itself pertaining to the subject of these communities. There are, all the same, some people not here in the West, but in the traditional Orthodox countries, who, when it comes to the standard of ecclesiastical responsibilities, occasionally do not express total confidence in those Orthodox of Western formation. There are also those who identify Orthodox tradition with local cultures.

We in the West have, on this precise matter, to confront them in their dissent and to ask them if they truly believe that the Orthodox tradition – the tradition of the Church – is a universal and catholic tradition, not to be limited to some eras of human culture. At the same time, our witness obliges us to say the same thing to those in the West. Our Orthodox communities in the West are obliged to speak to both parties, they are obliged to speak to all those who would place fetters on the witness of Orthodoxy.

A.N.: The Orthodox Church is entering the final preparatory phase of its future council in which is found at its center the question of the canonical organization of all the new Orthodox Churches in Europe, America, Australia, Japan – what is called the “diaspora.”

F.J.: If the preparation continues as it has until now, it has no chance to succeed in so far as those who are primarily involved with this problem are not invited. I believe that everywhere this is beginning to be understood a little. Certainly, in practice, those primarily involved, i.e. the Orthodox of the “diaspora,” are participating in this preparatory work: they write, they speak, one recognizes that they exist; but their participation remains extremely limited. Certain traditional centers of Orthodoxy do not consider it acceptable to accord them a place. It is altogether deplorable.

I hope that the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which is the first in being responsible for the preparation of this council, will find the means to unblock these impasses that are rather artificial and that preparations for the future council will be facilitated.

Read the rest here.

The Episcopal Assembly

Yes, I have been keeping tabs on the goings on in NYC. Last night I even started to write a post on the subject. But halfway into it, I realized I had very little to note that others haven't already said, in many cases better than I could. So I will confine myself to referring those interested in the much anticipated meeting of our hierarchs to some of the sites covering or commenting on the affair.

For coverage of the meeting and the text of some of the opening speeches Josephus over at Byzantine Texas has been doing a good job of keeping up on things. Two good blog posts dealing with the hopes for the Assembly that I strongly recommend were written by Fr. Jonathon (hat tip Owen) and Fr. Stephen Freeman. Both are in my opinion excellent posts.

The Pittsburgh Post Gazette: Hopes rising for unifying Orthodoxy's U.S. churches

America's Orthodox Christians, divided for decades among about 10 churches based on Greek or Serb or other ancestry, soon may be moving toward the formation of a united American Orthodox church.

Many of them have dreamed of that for decades, especially as conversions to Orthodoxy have skyrocketed. But most church patriarchs have squelched such talk.

Now it appears that the patriarchs are not only supporting but demanding some sort of unity. To explore what this may mean for believers in the United States, the independent, pan-Orthodox group Orthodox Christian Laity will gather for three days, starting Thursday, at Antiochian Village in Ligonier.

In 1994 that retreat center hosted the first and only gathering of all Orthodox bishops in North America. Believing they had approval from church patriarchs overseas, those bishops called for a united church in which the faithful would not be treated as "scattered children" of ancestral homelands.

But the ecumenical patriarch in Constantinople -- the spiritual head of global Orthodoxy -- denounced it as a rebellion against the ancient church and replaced the Greek archbishop who had led it. The unity movement lay dormant for 15 years.

Then, in June, the 14 Old World patriarchs gathered in Chambesy, Switzerland, and declared that all Orthodox bishops outside of traditional Orthodox lands -- including North America -- will begin meeting to address their own issues in their own lands.

Read the rest here.

Archimandrite Touma (Bitar) writes on the scandals in North America

One of the most respected Monastic Fathers in the Arab/Greek Church has written a powerful indictment of the scandalous state of affairs in the American Orthodox Church. (This was originally written in Arabic and has only recently been translated thanks to blogger SAMN!.) The impetus and focus of his letter is the current crisis in the Antiochian Archdiocese, chronicled in detail by our favorite ochlophobist. However he really lays it on the line and addresses the broader situation, correctly diagnosing the roots of the many problems here as being the interference of foreign churches in America coupled with an unhealthy dose of the passions and a craving for power.

I strongly encourage that it be read in its entirety. However, out of respect for the blogger who translated it I am only going to post a part of it and then send you to his blog for the rest.

The situation of all the Orthodox eparchies dependent on mother churches in North America is uncanonical. There is one Orthodox church in those lands whose situation is sound and canonical: the American Orthodox Church (OCA). This alone is independent and autocephalous and this is de-facto recognized by the other Orthodox eparchies. Its recognition, formal or implicit, by the eparchies depending on mother churches is clear and frank confirmation that the status of these eparchies is uncanonical and unsound. If these eparchies and mother churches on which they depend were to be logical with themselves and consistent with Orthodox ecclesiological and canonical thought, in the true sense of the word, then they would belong to the OCA or would at least enter into an understanding with it and the thorny crisis of the Orthodox presence there, theologically and canonically, would end. The simplest position and the most sound is for us to leave the Orthodox in North America to themselves and to encourage them to arrange their affairs themselves! We and the other mother churches are the ones who are complicating their affairs!

Naturally, there are those who claim that the problem of the diaspora is, to a great extent, a problem of nationalist sentiment. The sentiments exist, but not to the degree that is thought. The Church in the past has dealt with nationalism-- in Constantinople, in Antioch, and elsewhere-- and she is able to deal with it in every time and place whenever proper ecclesial sentiment abounds. But if nationalistic notions eclipse concern of the Church, then this is a dangerous event and a serious deviation because we are no longer a church possessing one faith, but rather a group of tribes. The truth is that the mother churches hold on to their eparchies in North America because they do not want to be stripped of their prerogatives and their benefits and their power there. The issue of money plays an important role in this matter and likewise does political and ecclesial influence. None of this has any connection to the Church in the exact meaning of the word, not to her theology, nor to her canons, nor to pastoral care for her people nor to her spirituality.

I will return to the subject of the bishops and I will say that the hidden cause behind the debate going on between those who hold to the concept of titular, helper bishops and the concept of local bishops over a people and a territory is, in reality, related to the passions. There is struggle for power, in the worldly sense, going on, and the arguments put forth call for each to claim his own power and leadership. But we have no power to receive, rather service to give for the Church of Christ and the People of God. For this reason, if we were to be just, then we must, first and last, to put pastoral care for the People of God before ourselves and before any other standard. The struggle for power going on today is, unfortunately, on account of this pastoral care! The single legitimate and acceptable question in this context is: what is most appropriate for the care of the Orthodox faithful here and there?

For this reason it is to be hoped that the interaction of the metropolitan with the bishops within a single eparchy, wherever they may be and especially right now in North America, will be first of all with goodness, love, humility of heart, and magnanimity. The issue of the episcopate, which has long been outside the genuine ecclesiology, will not be solved by emptying it of its pastoral content and enshrining its titularity, and not by, in response, idolatrously harping on the application of cannons but rather by the metropolitan embracing the bishops as brothers, and the bishops the metropolitan. Calmly and deliberately we will become able to solve our issues in cooperation and simplicity and flexibility, relying on [Orthodox] principles, and we will raise up the People of God in truth so that God will be glorified in us. The way of dividing, subjugating with decisions from on high, and debasing is of no avail. It will only alienate and create factions and lead to schism! I say this and it is to be feared that we are in a delicate and dangerous situation. Orthodox America will not be treated in the ruinous way we are accustomed to in our lands here! If we do not leave our selfishness and our pride and build each other up with kindness and generosity and put the good of the Church and its unity and theological principles ahead of any personal consideration, whatever it may be, then worse is to come!

Read it all and read it carefully here.
Hat tip to the Ochlophibist

Note: While correcting a typo on the original post, blogger had a hiccup and wiped out the entire thing. Needless to say I was annoyed as I had to reconstruct the post from memory. Fortunately there was not much of my own writing to repost. That said, if you looked at this right after I posted it and are looking at it again now you may notice some minor differences in wording. The post is substantially the same though.

The OCA's Mission: To Disappear?

Another fascinating address by Metropolitan Jonah has been posted online for those who missed the live broadcast. It has way too many points to post excerpts while doing justice to the speech.

Read the entire address here.
Or listen to it here

Hat tip OCANews