Ethnicism and Ecumenism: Two Sides of the Same Coin
An inquirer wrote in the following question concerning the Letter to the Editor which we quoted in a previous journal entry (“Orthodoxy: ‘Our Little Grocery Store’ For Sale”):
“The above article seems to put the blame on the atrocious decision at Holy Cross at the feet of an immigrant mind set. Would it be more accurate to put the blame at the feet of an ecumenist mind set?”
Here was our answer:
Ecumenism and Ethnicism, apparently opposed, are two sides of the same coin, somewhat like captialism and communism. Both philetism (or ethnicism) and ecumenism deny the catholicity of the Church; both serve to secularize the Church and turn its attention to this world. Yes, ethnicism is a secularizing force in the Church. Ecumenism is not opposed to the limitations ethnicism imposes on the Church, but rather aims at leaving each in his own place, but uniting them superficially, not in truth. The ethnic mentality which has been so deeply impressed on Orthodox mindsets for centuries has served to deny - in practice - the catholicity of the Church, setting up Orthodox Christians to accept that they are not “the whole”, but “a part” that needs to be completed, at least “horizontally”, if not “vertically”. In this way philetism has lead to ecumenism.
In the case of Fr. Clapsis’ rational for appointing a Jesuit this is very clear: we don’t want to be a little grocery store venture (an ethnic-only venture) but want to be “a part of the whole” (ecumenism’s pseudo-catholicity) and accepted by the world (secularism). It is the immigrant mentality at the service of ecumenism. And it is quite a nature relationship, since both are worldly and both serve to deny the catholicity of the Church for the sake of this world.
Orthodoxy: “Our Little Grocery Store” For Sale
Another step into the mainstream and “respectability” – another step into confusion and away from confession – was made at Holy Cross recently. “A Roman Catholic Jesuit priest has been named chairman of the newly established Orthodox Patristic Institute of Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology. Rev. Robert J. Daly, professor emeritus of Theology at Boston College, was chosen by Holy Cross to organize the Institute. In response to the question how and why a Jesuit priest has been placed at the helm of an Orthodox Institute, Rev. Clapsis said that Rev. Daly ‘has experience in Institutes. He is one of the founders of the Boston Theological Institute, as well as the first Director of the Jesuit Institute at Boston College,’ adding that ‘we appointed a Roman Catholic to help us so our Institute is not a small grocery store, but to have a serious structure. We (the Orthodox) are only a handful, and sometimes there are personal sensitivities and animosities.’”
What can be said? The following excerpts from a letter to the editor, which appeared on the Orthodox News site, are a sample of what the body of faithful had to say in response:
“The appointment of a Jesuit and a Papist theologian to head the Holy Cross Seminary Orthodox Institute of Patristic Studies is simple astounding for its boldness in betraying Orthodox principles and sensibilities. Beyond this betrayal, however, the mentality underlying this decision is very revealing, although sadly typical. Namely, that on account of the desire to “not remain a little grocery store” but be accepted by the worldly, a papist theologian, and no less a Jesuit, was chosen. How sad. How pathetic. It is not enough that this kind of inferiority complex has permeated so much of the immigrant Orthodox community and ruined many a soul through immersion into the worldliness of “fulfilling the American dream”, etc. etc., but now this mentality is informing major decisions regarding the faith.
If those who supported his decision have no sense, at least they should have some shame and repent of this betrayal of Orthodox principles. If one does not confess the Orthodox faith and live it, how can he possibly run an Orthodox Institute for Patristic Studies?! Have we gone back into our western captivity so soon? Have we learned nothing of the failure of western Christians who subjected their faith to scholastic scrutiny and rationalism? Have we now jettisoned the maxim that a theologian is one who prays and one who prays is a theologian? Is experience now unnecessary in order to theologize?...”
Click here for the full letter to the editor.
Read Less...
Professor George Mantzaridis on Ecumenism and Universality
"Contemporary ecumenism seek first of all the union of the christian world and not the preservation of its identity. It is interested in the body of Christians and not the body of Christ. That is why whatever has to do with the body of Christ - Christ Himself and the Church, which is set forth in christology and ecclesiology - is relegated to a secondary position. Ecumenism sees neither christology nor ecclesiology theologically from above, but ventures to create christology and ecclesiology using the contemporary secularized anthropology and sociology. The “from below” christology, as well as the ecclesiology “of branches,” confirm this state of things.
Here is found the main difference between contemporary ecumenism and the universality or ecumenicity of the indivisible Church. The Orthodox Church persists in the truth of christology, for this offers the base for true anthropology. Heretical anthropology distorts anthropology, in addition to ecclesiology. There cannot exist a healthy body of the Church, when the faith concerning her head, Who is Christ, has been altered. Nor can there be healthy cells in a body which has a mutated head. The contribution of the Orthodox Church, which was present at the formation of the contemporary ecumenical dialogue, has not yielded any substantial result. . . It could be said, on the contrary, that within orthodox circles a certain theological minimalism has been cultivated in the name of some kind of ecumenical cooperation and overture.”
-- Univerality and Ecumenism, Christian Ethics, (Thessaloniki, Pounara, 2002), page 277.
"The universality of the Church is the universality of the Spirit of God. Contemporary ecumenism is a movement of good-willed people. The first unites all those who live within it. The second keeps divided all those that follow it. The methology of contemporary ecumenism leads naturally to, not only confessional, but also religious sycretism. The abandonment of the catholic truth of the Church. . . naturally expands into wider religious syncretism in order to acheive the fullest possible reilgious sythesis. It follows that [ecumenism] is not carried out as an authentic dialogue of christian love and truth, but as an attempt at blending together christian and other religious truths. Indeed, it might even be claimed [by those who hold this position] that any other position held within this perspective would conceal a racist attitude.”
-- Univerality and Ecumenism, Christian Ethics, (Thessaloniki, Pounara, 2002), page 279.
Read Less...
