Some Characteristic Features of Orthodoxy
Some Characteristic Features of Orthodoxy
by Staniloae Dimitru, Fr. Prof. Dr.
From the hommage to Nicos A. Nissiotis, Athens 1994
It is a fact that Orthodoxy is identical
in its faith-content and worship with the faith-content and worship of
primitive Christianity. Yet the extraordinary and absolutely genuine
fact about it is that, while being essentially the continuation of the
faith, worship, and spirituality of the undivided Church of the first
centuries, Orthodoxy meets in a perfect manner, the spiritual need of
the people who have remained loyal to it down to this day.
Orthodoxy did not change essentially during the historical periods
experienced by humanity over two thousand years. But it is due to this
fact that Orthodoxy did not become impregnated during these centuries
with anything which would require elimination of in our times. Nor did
Orthodoxy make an essential feature of its existence out of the
temporary element of one historical period or another and hence the need
to get rid of it nowadays. Orthodoxy did not turn ?middle-aged?,
(moyenagee), as happened with Roman Catholicism; nor is it the
by-product of the protest movement of the Renaissance as is the case
with Protestantism; it does not seek, even today, to reform itself
essentially in order to accommodate itself to our times by way of
secularisation.
Orthodoxy has not introduced into the mysterious sanctuary, long-proven
by a simple expression of faith, subtle and complicated innovations of
certain maitres, dominated by the desire for a certain sweetness
offered by an intellectual exercise rather than by the abysmal and
overwhelming awe of the mystery of the relationship between man and
God.
Orthodoxy has never mixed together superfluous patterns of human thought
with the simple, mysterious, majestic, permanently and inevitably
lived essence of the fundamental data of the mystery of salvation.
One could say Orthodoxy has preserved a mass character, for the people
in their simplicity remain very little sensitive to the successive
ideologies of the historical periods, but stay open to the real and
essential problems of all times.
Orthodoxy needs no secularization today in order to encounter the
contemporary man. On the contrary, it knows well that, by becoming
secularized it would lose sight of man and would no longer respond to
the fundamental problems of salvation that keep burning under the ashes
in the very depths of man's being.
Certainly, Orthodoxy has always accommodated itself to the times. It has
always helped the loyal faithful in all the circumstances and in their
endeavours and struggles to preserve their existence, to free
themselves from alien domination. The Romanian Orthodox Church, having
introduced the national (vernacular) language in church services over
three centuries ago, has helped create a Romanian literary language.
But the accommodation of Orthodoxy to the times did not mean an
alteration of its being a mystery, nor did it mean a replacement of the
mystery by an ideology determined by one epoch or another. Orthodoxy
has done all this by fully understanding the value of creation. It has
always remained the mystery of simple data, but fundamental and
necessary for the religious life.
Orthodoxy has always done and still does things that way. In this
respect it mediates Christ to the faithful, Christ who is ?the same
yesterday and today and for ever? (Hebr. 13,8). It is Jesus Christ who,
being the same forever answers in a perfect manner today as He did
yesterday.
The Ancient Law was subject to alteration since its revelation was ever
growing and, by that, it kept on widening its meaning before being,
eventually, replaced by Christ. The setting aside of the Law was caused
by the latter's imperfection as a mystery of salvation: ?A former
command is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness (for the
Law made nothing perfect)? (Heb.7,18-19).
All human ideologies undergo the same process. Each dies and another one
takes its place like ?the priests who were many in number? (Heb.7,23).
?But He holds His priesthood permanently, because He continues for
ever. Consequently He is able for all time to save those who draw near
to God..., since He always lives to make intercession for them?
(Heb.7,24-25).
Orthodoxy has understood that it needs no changing for the perfect
dignity of the High Priesthood of Christ, nor to add or suppress
anything, but rather that its only task is to emphasize time and again
this dignity in its fullness. The saying: ?Ecclesia semper reformanda?
does not apply in Orthodoxy since Orthodoxy communicates Christ
integrally, Him who is ?semper conformis cum omni tempore?.
The mystery of salvation has always been lived to the full within
Orthodoxy. Those few recent terms adopted by the Ecumenical Councils did
not mean to bring down the mystery to a rationalistic definition but
precisely to guarantee its being a mystery as against those temptations
to rationalize and limit it, or to make it disappear altogether.
Those terms were meant to protect permanently the mysterious and
salutary fact announced in the New Testament, namely that we are saved
by the Son of God, who, to that end, became man and remains eternally
the same God and man; also that we are saved by God who at the same time
is perfect man and, as such, entirely accessible to us, for that we
are saved by a man who, being fully accessible to us as man He is also
fully accessible to us as God, or even better to say, as the infinite
source of life.
The Ecumenical Councils protected the mystery of our salvation,
according to which the infinite source of life was made accessible to
us, to the extent that the human person became accessible to us as our
neighbour. The Councils drew a line between the pantheistic hellenism
under the guise of gnosis, and God as Person in communion, and thereby
have confirmed the eternal value of man as Person.
The Councils withstood the rationalist temptation to void of meaning the
mystery of salvation and thereby to make illusory salvation itself by
turning God into an essence (ousia) submitted to rational laws and by
foreseeing the disappearance of man in that essence. It is only the
person that can escape rationalism and remain an inexhaustible mystery,
and at the same time to be nearest to any person in the way God is
nearest to us and at the same time an inexhaustible mystery.
A current objection to Orthodoxy is that, like Western Christianity, it
accommodated itself to medieval Renaissance and also Byzantine
mentality and buried the living kernel of the Christian mystery under a
heap of formalist and aristocratic splendour which no longer
corresponds to our time.
We do not deny that Orthodoxy experienced a Byzantine influence. But
this influence did not touch upon the essence of Christian mystery.
What has been considered to be a Byzantine heritage in the life of the
Eastern Orthodox Church is, particularly, the multitude of symbols
expressing both the Christian faith and its being as lived in worship,
in art, and in life. But the Byzantine impact and influence could only
foster the development of a symbolism inherent in the expression of
Christian mystery.
The intellectual definitions and the doctrinal expositions whereby the
West has tried (and still tries) to replace the exposition of mystery by
way of symbols have their point of origin in the conviction that this
mystery can be expressed exactly in human words.
In reality this mystery is narrowed down or even diluted wherever one
wishes to encapsulate it in the strict meaning of words and intellectual
definitions. The paradoxical and apophatic fullness of the mystery of
salvation is more exactly rendered by symbols.
Τo speak of the Cross and Resurrection in a general way, to contemplate
them in icons, to express them in symbolic and liturgical gestures
suggests in a more realistic and existential way the mystery of
salvation than does the satisfaction theory of Anselm or the poenal
theory of the Protestants who are able to express but one aspect of the
incomprehensible mystery of salvation.
If Orthodoxy needs to accommodate itself to the needs of contemporary
man, it cannot consist in a total reduction of the symbolic expression.
It can only consist in a simplification of this expression in order to
see straight away the great symbols of the Christian mystery which
correspond to the great, simple, permanent, evidences and spiritual
necessities of man. Namely: God near to us as human person; resurrection
through the Cross; glory through humility; power to restrain oneself,
and patience; freedom through grace; the value of this life through
faith in the hereafter; individuality through communion; development of
one's own personality through self-denial, and so on.
Originally from: Myriobiblos