ORTHODOXY IN THE 21st CENTURY
The 20th century was, for Orthodoxy, a period of significant change and up- heaval. With the rise of the ecumenical movement, Orthodox theology, par- ticularly within the framework of Orthodox Diaspora, emerged, for the first time, from its introversion and confessional isolation and entered into dialogue with the other major Christian traditions, as well as the challenges of the modern world. This promising process of Orthodox renewal was closely connected to the so-called “neo-patristic synthesis” and noted theological figures such as Fr. Georges Florovsky, Vladimir Lossky, Paul Evdokimov, Fr. Nicholas Afanasiev, Fr. Dumitru Staniloae, Fr. Justin Popovic, Fr. Alexander Schmemann, Fr. John Meyen- dorff, and Olivier Clément, as well as the lesser-known contributions of theolo- gians and philosophers of the Diaspora, such as Fr. Sergei Bulgakov and Nikolai Berdyaev. In addition to these figures, one would do well to also remember the contributions, in recent years, of Greek theologians such as Nikos Nisiotis, Sav- vas Agouridis, Fr. John Romanidis, His Eminence Metropolitan of Pergamon John Zizioulas, Christos Yannaras, Panayiotis Nellas, Fr. Vasilios Gondikakis, Nikos
Matsoukas, and George Mantzaridis, among others.
However, in an era of rapid change —i.e. late modernity, globalization, and multi-culturalism—, Orthodoxy is today confronted with radically new challenges that were hitherto unknown and completely different from what it has experi- enced in its past—challenges that require reflection and creative thinking. De- spite the attempt at openness and renewal that began to emerge in the last cen- tury, Orthodox theology continues to be virtually absent from the modern theological arena and the international theological discussion, while the phobic reaction and conservative defensiveness of some distinguished Orthodox the- ologians, which can be observed in response to the challenges of globalization and multi-culturalism, results in an inability or even refusal to engage and enter- tain the questions that are posed by the modern world. With a few notable ex- ceptions, Orthodox theology continues to avoid a critical and creative encounter with the most significant trends in western theological and philosophical thought, such as the historical-critical method in biblical studies, dialectical theology, ex- istential and hermeneutical theology, the “theological turn” of phenomenology, liberation theologies, feminist theologies—in a word, with the theological ex- pressions and ideas of our time. Meanwhile, it is often unable to overcome an outdated ethnocentric way of thinking about its ecclesiology and unity.
Orthodox theology has often been described as traditional in referring to its basic source of inspiration and foundation, viz. its rich patristic tradition, which often tends to be absolutized into a kind of unique or even infallible criterion of truth and “orthodoxy.” We thus see Orthodox theology bound to methods and principles that require a completely different worldview (such as, for example, that of the Byzantine era), while its language and way of thinking are connected largely if not exclusively with the categories of thought produced by Greek phi- losophy and ontology.
These comments serve as an introduction to the crucially important question of whether and to what extent Orthodoxy can, while remaining faithful to its rich patristic tradition, engage in dialogue with—or, rather, become incarnate in—the post-modern world of the 21st century, following the example of its incarnate Lord, and thus assuming in practice the theological, anthropological, and historical/cultural consequences that result from the Incarnation. In other words, the central question to be posed is whether it is inherently possible for Orthodox theology to function not only as a traditional theology but also as a contextual one. This question, however, cannot be answered easily or unequivocally. It re- quires Orthodox theology to undertake serious and, above all, sincere work, de- void of prejudice, in order to highlight once again those things that contributed to the formulation of the patristic tradition which, in its time, was more con- textual than traditional.
Unfortunately, it is not well understood today that the rich patristic tradi- tion—which often is used as an ideological excuse to mask the theological short- comings of our time—was never a monolithic, ahistorical, and unchanging con- struct, but was constantly being renewed by the grace of the Spirit, engaging and sanctifying the cultural, social, and historical context of each time. This dynamic seems today to have abated or even been obscured, with the result that theol- ogy appears usually as a complete and closed system that comes from without, or is even imposed, and that attempts—with a methodology, language, and way of thinking that belong to irrevocably bygone eras— to offer to the world today the “good news” about the salvation of creation and man. Thus, unaware of its crisis of self-consciousness, the Church continues to preach the word of God in terms borrowed from agrarian pre-modern society. Liturgical and theological symbolisms, the rhetorical models of preaching, the structures of church ad- ministration, the Church’s anthropological views and ossified perceptions about the relationship between the sacred and the profane, religion and politics, the Church and society are all connected with this kind of pre-modern society. Or- thodoxy everywhere, Greek-speaking or otherwise, still continues to employ classical Greek philosophical categories in its standard theological expression, which, in the Greek case, frequently assumes a blatantly ideological character, as if classical Greek thought were still the predominant philosophy in the world to- day, or as if there were still room for nostalgia about the glorious “Helleno-Chris- tianity” of the past or ethnocentric fantasies. As a consequence of all this, the Church and theology, remaining often on the fringes of modern developments,demonstrate unease if not outright hostility to any kind of involvement in the public sphere as part of an equal and open society, instead hiding behind specious arguments from bygone eras.
Keeping in mind this problematic reality, we ought to reflect on this and ask ourselves: can Orthodox theology, at the beginning of this new millennium, con- tinue to preach Jesus Christ “and him crucified” and resurrected (cf. 1 Cor 1:23; 2:2) to contemporary man, remaining faithful to its sources and to its experience of and orientation toward the Holy Spirit, while also ministering to the existen- tial and spiritual needs of the people of our time and not an idealistic state of af- fairs held over from another time? Will the Church dare to incarnate in our post- modern world the eternal truth of the Gospel, assuming critically and creatively the very flesh of the post-modern world, and not some distant or even illusory “Christian” society? Will it attempt to theologically receive and welcome other- ness or will it persist in a fundamentalistic and polemical understanding of its tra- dition, even to the point of refusing to recognize elements of Christianity and ec- clesiality in the Christian traditions of the West?
The Volos Academy for Theological Studies will address these issues and the above questions in a series of events that will culminate in an international con- ference, organized in collaboration with other Institutions, in Volos from 3-6 June on the topic: “Neo-Patristic Synthesis or ‘Post-Patristic’ Theology: Can Ortho- dox Theology be Contextual?” In parallel, the Volos Academy will also organize, from February to July 2010, in Greece and abroad, roundtable discussions, pub- lic events, new book presentations, seminars, and conferences on topics such as “The Place of Religion in the Public Sphere,” “Refugees, Immigrants, and the Church,” “The Shifting Versions of Helleno-Christianity (19th-20th centuries)”, “The Renewal of Contemporary Greek Theology: From the Generation of the ‘60s to the Challenges of Today,” and “Issues of Renewal and Reformation facing the Orthodox Church,” while also continuing training seminars for religious teach- ers concerning the place of classes on religion and its curriculum in the new cul- tural and social environment.
Below you can flip through the program.
PROGRAM ACADEMIC YEAR 2009-2010.
Download here the Registration Form for Contectual Theology Conference 3-6
