Orthodoxy in Unity and in Conciliarity

This article considers how the Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church faced challenges such as how the gospel relates to a pluralistic society; the Christian message in a society marked by religious pluralism, ethnic diversity, and cultural relativism; whether Christians encountering today's pluralist society should concentrate on evangelism or on dialogue; and on how conciliarity relates to the unity of the church. The article examines how the council attempted to respond to, or at least reflect on, these challenges in relation to the theological dialogue of the Orthodox Church with the other Christian churches and confessions. The bilateral theological dialogues have also increasingly led to bearing Christian witness, and an atmosphere of mutual appreciation, friendship, and fellowship has already become at least a reality. But has this development also led to a deeper mutual theological understanding? Have the profound differences between the Orthodox churches and the other churches in bilateral dialogues been clarified theologically?     

The big friendly counter-space? Interreligious encounter within social media

ABSTRACT

Research on interreligious dialogue mostly focuses on face-to-face meetings, however, it also takes place in other contexts. Among them is the huge space of interactive media, where adherents of different religious traditions meet, e.g., in interreligious groups on Facebook, boards or commentary sections – but so far little has been researched on this field. The article is an explorative attempt to sort the field of interreligious dialogue and encounter in social media, drawing on a comparative perspective on the field of offline interreligious dialogue. For this purpose, it first gives a systematizing overview of the existing research on interreligious encounter in social media as well as on (offline) interreligious dialogue, identifying key questions and issues on interreligious encounter. Examples from different social media platforms then allow conclusions about commonalities and differences between online and offline interreligious encounter and suggest crucial aspects to follow up on in future research on this field.     

‘Interfaith dialogue’ as a form of opposition of ‘minority religions’ to governmental pressure in Russia

Russian governmental policy toward non-traditional religious groups, especially so-called New Religious Movements (NRMs), is discriminatory. Despite Russia’s formal secularity, the government strongly supports the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), a position which results in various limitations on many other religious groups. As a result, legal actions have been initiated against new religious groups, for example the Bhagavad Gita trial in Tomsk, Siberia, and the designation of the literature of the Jehovah’s Witnesses as ‘extremist’. However, pressure by the government can sometimes lead to the development of spontaneous interreligious oppositional associations. One important example is the ‘interfaith dialogue’ in Tomsk, where local leaders or representatives of religious groups, such as the Episcopal, Jewish, and Latter-day Saints (Mormon) churches as well as the Hare Krishna movement, unorthodox Buddhist groups, and local pagan movements, united to oppose governmental and ROC efforts to disband a Hare Krishna group in the Tomsk area. This research note presents results of a case study, which involved participant observation, of the phenomenon of oppositional interfaith dialogue in Tomsk in the period 2011–2014. I discuss factors that influenced its appearance, its relationship with the local government, and the methods of cooperation between the different religious groups within this association and offer some theoretical interpretations of these developments. The results of this case study illustrate new and important modern relationships between minority religions and the government in Russia.     

The Ecumenical Significance of the Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church

From 20 to 26 June 2016, following a century of preparatory work, the Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church met on the island of Crete. Among the various documents agreed by the council, the most controversial before, during, and after the council was the one on “The Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World.” This article sets out the importance of this statement, and considers and responds to the various criticisms of it that have emerged among certain Orthodox groups and individuals. The article concludes that despite such objections, the statement has a crucial ecumenical significance, and that, for the first time in its history, the Orthodox Church has taken a conciliar decision with regard to participation in the ecumenical movement and engagement in theological dialogue with other Christian churches and confessions.     

“I Saw a Peach Tree in Full Bloom”: Transformative Spirituality and Mission in an Interreligious Context

The crisis in Sri Lanka, which is rooted in the politics of ethnicity and reached a new stage in May 2009 when the government forces militarily defeated the Tamil Tiger rebels, forms the backdrop to this article. Transformative spirituality in this context is demonstrated in the strong bond of friendship between the author, a Sri Lankan Sinhalese, and a colleague who is a Sri Lankan Tamil. The article draws upon four principles of transformative spirituality in the interreligious context articulated by Sri Lankan Jesuit priest Aloysius Pieris. First, it must take the context seriously, which, in the Sri Lankan context means its grinding poverty and its rich religious diversity, to which must now be added the devastating war that has just concluded. Second, robust interreligious dialogue requires that Christians look beyond typologies such as exclusivism, inclusivism and pluralism, and engage other religious traditions on their own terms. Third, unless religions engage with the other core‐to‐core, rather than engage the kernel of Christianity with the husk of Buddhism, there cannot be genuine transformative spirituality. Fourth, transformative spirituality is only possible when the core of Christianity meets the core of Buddhism in the praxis of liberation. Acknowledging that dialogue never engages only the participants' religious identity, but engages the other as a whole person with multiple identities, the article applies Pieris' interreligious dialogue principles to conflictual ethnic relations seeking to provide dialogue as a model for other types of reconciliation.     

Two traditions,one space: orthodox Christians and Muslims in dialogue

The Eastern Orthodox Church has encountered Islam from the first decades of its appearance and they interacted in a variety of ways. Most frequently the meeting took the form of polemical clash and confrontation. However, in the many centuries of silent coexistence, it was often expressed in a concrete form of dialogue that sought to define the differences and the positions of the two religious forms and experiences. The present study focuses on the contemporary academic dialogues between Orthodox Christianity and Islam which began in the spring of 1985 at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology in Brookline, MA. These dialogues were initiated by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and further meetings were held under its auspices in Chambésy, Constantinople (Istanbul), Athens, and Amman. This article presents the issues discussed, pointing to the fact that peaceful coexistence and justice may only prevail on a basis of mutual knowledge and understanding of the other.     

Missiological Context of the Eastern Orthodox Churches in Africa

This article focuses on the missiological context of the Eastern Orthodox Churches in Africa under the jurisdiction of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria and All Africa, which serves the Greek‐, Arabic‐, and Russian‐speaking communities as well as native African Orthodox communities in sub‐Saharan Africa. The apostolic mission to Africa started in the city of Alexandria by St Mark the evangelist around 62–63 AD. The gospel flourished in the Alexandrian church through its famous catechetical school, participation in the ecumenical councils, and monasticism. After Islamic invasion of northern Africa (640 AD), Christianity started to decline and the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria extended its jurisdiction to sub‐Saharan Africa. First it served the Greek communities, but later in 1946 opened up to evangelize to native African communities. Orthodox Church mission engagement in sub‐Saharan African has resulted in different mission approaches, like the creation of new dioceses and archdioceses, theological education, and liturgical, incarnational, and reconciliation approaches. These approaches have prepared the missiological context of the Eastern Orthodox Church in Africa for an Africanized Christianity. Native Africans searched for ecclesial identity by affiliating with Greek Orthodoxy, consequently rekindling the mission of the Orthodox Church worldwide and creating a platform for dialogue between African cultural‐religious particularities and Orthodox theological ethos. This has resulted in a call for inculturation or incarnational process aiming for an “African local church.”     

Interreligious contact and media: introduction

ABSTRACT

Religious pluralisation entails interreligious contacts of different kinds and at various levels. At the same time, an increasing mediatisation affects the perception of and encounter with other religious traditions and their adherents. These relations between interreligious contact and media have not yet been subject to extended research from the study of religion perspective. This issue wants to fill this gap by presenting different case studies and systematising considerations on constellations of interreligious contact/dialogue/encounter and media: specifically (a) the influence of mediated discourses on interreligious contact, (b) media extensions of local and global interreligious dialogue, and (c) the digital – and especially social – media as a platform for interreligious dialogue or encounter. This introduction gives an overview on concepts, questions and topics of this field of research, drawing on the case studies within this special issue.     

Constructive Dialogical Pluralism: A Context of Interreligious Relations

This article presents current philosophical reflections on religious diversity and concomitant attitudes towards the interreligious situation. The motive behind this presentation is to show that in order to deal more efficiently with the phenomenon of religious plurality, there is a need for a development of the philosophy of religion, where new perspectives are opened up and explored. The very concept of religion as a belief system is put into question, since it has caused philosophical reflections on religious diversity to be confined to certain metaphysical and epistemological concerns. Instead of focusing on the noun ‘religion’, the article suggests a way to understand the adjective ‘religious’ and view religious plurality as a plurality of ways of being religious. This opens up a certain context of interreligious relations and interreligious dialogue, where this very dialogue itself can contribute to the development of philosophical tools, concepts and categories for dealing with the fact of plurality. I call this context constructive dialogical pluralism.     

Me,myself and the other. Interreligious and intrareligious relations in neo-conservative online forums

ABSTRACT

The Internet can be a place for exchange, but also foster echo chambers of closed world views. This poses interesting questions for the possibility of interreligious dialogue online. The article examines the cases of German Evangelical and Salafist Internet forums which mainly target a specific religious denomination, but nevertheless provide spaces for contact between different religions and denominations. For the study, a combination of quantitative and qualitative text analysis is applied. Quantitative analysis makes it possible to gain an overview of the discussed themes from a large body of text and serves as a basis for sampling smaller textual units for close examination using qualitative content analysis. The analysis yields two primary results: First, intrareligious dialogue plays a particular role for the negotiation of religious identity. Second, interreligious relations reflect the societal positions of both religious groups.     

An Orthodox Perspective on the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification

In 1999, the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation signed the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, one of the main points at issue at the time of the 16th‐century Reformation. This article seeks to offer an Orthodox perspective on the Joint Declaration, through presenting an “Orthodox” approach to the doctrine of justification as the doctrine is set out in the text of the Joint Declaration. The article then discusses how this approach is reflected in the three international and regional dialogues between the Orthodox Church and the churches of the Reformation that took place almost simultaneously with the dialogue leading to the Lutheran–Catholic Joint Declaration.     

Towards a decolonized assessment of the religious other

When confronted by the plurality of religions (and the corresponding plurality of claims to truth), believers usually resort either to absolutism or relativism. The absolutist evaluates the religious other in view of criteria with which the latter does not agree. The religious other is thus being colonized by a hegemony (i.e. enforced homogeneity) of standards. In an attempt to transcend this hegemonic colonization, the relativist, on the other hand, simply surrenders the evaluation of the beliefs and practices of the religious other to subjective arbitrariness. This attempt at the decolonization of the religious other defeats itself, in so far as it deprives us of the right to criticise the beliefs and practices of any other, including the colonizing other. Avoiding both absolutism and relativism calls for an interreligious common scale which will, as such, allow the ‘objective’ or non-arbitrary evaluation of religious beliefs and practices. This scale can only, if at all, be identified through an ongoing interreligious dialogue which respects the particularity, individuality and historicity—or, in short, the non-foundational nature—of both religious and meta-religious beliefs. As such, interreligious dialogue constitutes the first step towards an effective decolonization of the religious other.     

Patriotism,Orthodox religion and education: empirical findings from contemporary Russia

In recent years, an objective of some Russian Orthodox activists and Church leaders has been the introduction of religious education in state schools which was established in Russia in 2012, following a 2009 Presidential Directive. Today, however, there are two different strands in religious education. On the one hand, there is the state’s emphasis on the bonds between Orthodox Christianity and Russian history, culture and identity. Based on this so-called culturological understanding of religion, the Russian state hopes to use Orthodoxy in nation- and institution-building and in the strengthening of patriotism. On the other hand, while the culturological language is also used in the Church’s official discourse, in practice there are many attempts by Orthodox clergymen and activists to use religious education for the purposes of evangelisation.     

THE DEVIL IN TECHNOLOGIES: RUSSIAN ORTHODOX NEOCONSERVATISM VERSUS SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS

One of the interesting aspects of Russian self‐definition in opposition to the West is its attitude toward Western science. Russian distrust of scientific and technological progress in the West is an important force shaping contemporary Russian identity. This article touches on these issues in four parts. The first section characterizes two main conservative circles that are active in today's disputes over the significance of scientific development for Russian identity. The second demonstrates certain Russian contemporary concerns related to scientific and technological progress, which will enable us to explain the position of the Russian Orthodox Church. The third section presents the political, religious, and identity context for the suspicion toward science expressed by Russian conservatives. The final section, on the other hand, discusses the way in which Russian Orthodox neoconservatism uses Orthodox anthropology to raise suspicion toward scientific and technological achievements.     

State policies towards religion and the Russian Orthodox Church in China

This article examines the history and current state of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) in China. It analyses both the declared and actual approach of the Chinese authorities towards Orthodox believers in China, as well as the attitude taken towards that approach by the authorities in Russia, where the ‘Orthodox factor’ plays an increasingly prominent role in domestic and foreign policy. The author shows that Russia’s most senior political leaders assist the ROC to strengthen the status of the Chinese Autonomous Orthodox Church (CAOC) and create better conditions for Chinese Orthodox believers. That effort has elevated the ‘Orthodox question’ to become an important issue of bilateral relations. As a result, and despite a lack of enthusiasm from the Chinese side, conditions could be created in the coming years for the normal functioning of the CAOC. At the same time, the Chinese Government is likely to consider it not as an autonomous part of the ROC (as the Orthodox canon considers it) but as one of the ‘patriotic religious organisations’ registered first at the provincial, and possibly later at the national level.     

A dialogue between the Orthodox Church of Georgia and the ‘Evangelical Christians-Baptists’ of Georgia (1979–1980) with its wider Baptist context

In 1979–80 conversations were held between representatives of the Orthodox Church of Georgia and the ‘Evangelical Christians-Baptists’ of Georgia in a situation of oppression by the Communist state. The agreed document that emerged from this dialogue is printed here, and is preceded by an article which expounds it from a Baptist perspective, sets it in the wider context of Baptist theological and ecumenical theology, and relates it to the practices of the present-day Baptist Church of Georgia. The stated purpose of the dialogue was to achieve reconciliation and unity between Orthodox and Baptist Christians in Georgia, first by agreeing substantial matters of doctrine and then by adopting a common liturgy and common sacramental life. Among the range of subjects reviewed, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, the saints, nationalism, confession and icons, the discussion on baptism is perhaps the most adventurous, and remains promising though flawed. The document does not represent the views of the present-day Orthodox Church of Georgia, and its contents clearly reflect the political pressures under which it was composed. However, it is of historical interest, and some will see it as a sign of hope for co-operation in the mission of God.     

Interreligious dialogue groups and the mass media

ABSTRACT

Interreligious dialogues have received attention since they were introduced as a security policy and social pacification measure after the attack on 9/11. This essay examines the development of interreligious dialogue in Germany as well as the influence of media discourses on interreligious dialogue and asks to what extent they affect the motives, goals and modes of communication of both Muslim and non-Muslim participants. This analysis leads to the thesis that the mass media’s frequent security-policy framing of Islam within issues of integration, violence, and threat has developed interreligious dialogue groups as a space of face-to-face coping processes with the imagined religious conflict. Muslims attend it in order to put Islam in a different and positive frame. For the Christian participants this also presents the opportunity to reach a new relevance of religion in the public secular space.     

The Mission of the Church in the Contemporary World in Light of the Decisions of the Holy and Great Council

This article discusses the place of mission in the Orthodox Church. The document “The Mission of the Orthodox Church in Today's World,” which was approved by the Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church held in Crete in 2016, is still in the process of reception, as are the other documents, but it constitutes, without doubt, a new era in Orthodox missiology – as indeed the Great and Holy Council in Crete represents a new era in Orthodoxy. The interrelatedness of unity and mission is not a question of methodology or strategy. It is an ontological one: it is related to the very essence of koinonia as fellowship in the triune God, and to the specific aspect of κοινονια as participation in God's economy in and for the world. Mission is commitment to the work of the triune God incarnated in Jesus Christ. Both are God’s gift and command. It is only in unity with the Holy Trinity that the church is able to fulfil its vocation.     

The Orthodoxy of the Anglo-Saxons: conversion and loyalty in the pre-conquest English Church

Though Eastern Christians generally regard the Western part of the Church to have split from Orthodoxy permanently in 1054, there have been calls by some to modify the date of this as regards the Anglo-Saxon Church. These Orthodox lay scholars and bishops argue that the Anglo-Saxon Church was more closely aligned with the Orthodox East rather than the Roman Catholic West, as evidenced by the canonisation of St Edward the Confessor and advocacy for the canonisation of King Harold II. This article questions these assertions by looking at the evidence provided by Anglo-Saxon connection to the Western Church, as well as the migration of Anglo-Saxons to Byzantium following the Battle of Hastings, as described in the Játvarðar Saga. It concludes by discussing what implications these findings have for the Orthodox Church in its canonisation of a technically non-Orthodox saint.     

The Russian Orthodox Church in Western Europe: one or many?

This article analyses the way Russian Orthodox communities, primarily in Western Europe, cope with the ecclesiological challenge of de-territorialisation and increased individual mobility in the modern world. It focuses on the developments within the three parallel Russian Orthodox jurisdictions in Western Europe, especially since the fall of the Iron Curtain. These developments can primarily be summarised in the context of two dilemmas. First, there is the question whether the ‘temporary’ solutions that were put in place as a result of the Soviet regime’s hostility towards the Russian Orthodox Church should come to an end in the new ‘free’ circumstances since 1990. Second, there is the question of how to reconcile Russian traditions and allegiances with the religious needs of local converts to Orthodoxy. The main developments include the conflict in the UK since the death of Metropolitan Anthony (Bloom) of Sourozh in 2003, the reunification of the Russian Orthodox Church with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia in 2007 and, most importantly, the developments in the Archdiocese of Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe (Exarchate of the Patriarchate of Constantinople) since the turn of the millennium. The French debate on the future of Russian Orthodoxy in Western Europe is the most pertinent one and provides a key to understanding the challenges posed to Orthodox ecclesiology in the West.