On Saturday
I participated in a highly interesting conference in Södertälje:
Theology
Manifested in Diversity
The
conference was organised by the Sankt Ignatios Foundation. The motto of the foundation
is
Religion,
Peace and Democracy through Education and Learning
When I saw this motto I felt that it is an important message in our time. In the era of fake news and post-truth we need education and learning. I believe that Sankt Ignatios Foundations plays an important role in the Orthodox world today.
I read on their website that "the Foundation is a collaboration between four Orthodox Churches, the Byzantine (Greek and Slavic) the Syriac, the Coptic and the Tewahedo (Eritrean-Ethiopian)". When I listened to some speeches during the conference dinner, I understood that this is not common, that different Orthodox churches cooperate like this. Again, it is part of the Peace project, I believe.
At the
conference,
The Order of Sankt Ignatios Award Ceremony was held. The order was
awarded to four laureates: Professor Ugo Zanetti (2022), Professor Susan
Ashbrook Harvey (2021), and Professors George Demacopoulos and Aristotle
Papanikolaou (2020). Due to the pandemic laurates from three years gathered
this time. And it was also the 10
th Anniversary of Sankt Ignatios
Foundation.
I had been
invited by the Foundation, which is part of the Swedish Bible Society. Dr.
Miriam Lindgren Hjälm, the Academic Dean for Religious Studies and Theology at
Sankt Ignatios College and a senior lecturer at the Department of Eastern
Christian Studies at Stockholm School of Theology, had connected me with the conference administration. She serves on the Board of
The Swedish Bible Society and also on the Translation Council.
Unfortunately,
I was not able to participate on Friday but joined the conference on Saturday
and was privileged to listen to two lectures. These were held by the 2020
laurates, Professors George Demacopoulos and Aristotle Papanikolaou. Both come
from the Orthodox Christian Studies Center at Fordham University, US.
I must
admit that I enjoyed the first lecture a lot. Therefore, I will comment only on
that one. The theme of George Demacopoulos’ lecture was:
The
Spiritual Discipline of Historical Self-Critique
He argued
that self-critique and communal truth telling is a more profound form of
asceticism than bodily asceticism. He had four theological arguments around the importance of self-critque:
- If God is truth,
we can be honest
- As
Christians we sometimes accept to be dishonest for various reasons, but this is
wrong
- Self-critique
can help the Church to regain credibility
- Self-critque
leads to unpleasant revelations but this is a resource in our quest for
transformation
(I hope
that I got these four points right).
After the
theological arguments he turned to some historical arguments
The early Church
saw the role of women positively
His argument
for this was taken from the New Testament itself. He referred to Galatians
chapter 3, but also to the end of St. Paul’s letter to the Romans. The whole
letter speaks very little about gender but in chapter 16, vers 1 Paul writes
about Phoebe.
I commend
to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church at Cenchreae, so that you may
welcome her in the Lord as is fitting for the saints, and help her in whatever
she may require from you, for she has been a benefactor of many and of myself
as well (Romans 16:1-2, NRSV)
According
to Prof Demacopoulos the word “deacon” (διάκονον) is in the masculine which
supports that Phoebe was a deacon. The word can also mean someone who serves.
Prof Demacopoulos argued that Paul sent the letter with her and therefore
regarded her as his most trusted theologian.
He continued
and said that women were part of Jesus' entourage. He then claimed that ancient
Judaism was as misogynist as Hellenism at the time. One argument for that was
that circumcision excluded women. (When time was given for questions, I asked him
if he had done research on that, and he then reversed and said that he just
wanted to show that Jesus was radical in his encounters with women. I argued
that Jesus, being a rabbi, maybe were inspired by other rabbis, who in fact held
the same values. It is always a risk that we use Judaism as a contrast to
Jesus. In fact, it was his context).
Anti-Judaism
His next
point – on the other hand – was exactly about that. He spoke about anti-Jewish
hymns in the early church. If I understood him correctly, the Jewish community
in Palestine in the sixth century was larger than the Christian. But the
emperor, Justianus I, favoured the Christians which made the Jews to attack the
Christian community. This made the Church write hymns that blamed the Jews for killing
Jesus. One can read more about the actual hymns via this link. It is from Fordham
University.
It is possible
to understand the hymns in the liturgical context as an expression of Christians blaming themselves for
the death of Jesus, but Prof Demacopoulos reiterated that this can not fully
defend the use of these hymns today. He claimed that antisemitism is on the rise
in some pockets of Orthodox world.
Roman Catholics
His third
point was about the schism in 1054. He argued that it did not cause a
sacramental break between the west and the east. He spoke about cultural
animosity and colonialism which caused a diplomatic break. The Pope and the
Patriarch stopped praying for one another. Even in 1220 there are proof of sacramental
union between east and west. And then he mentioned 1453 as a more correct year
of the break but even in the sixteenth century there are examples of
sacramental unity. The fourth crusade led to victimization on the Orthodox
side. That is the real damage. And it divided the Orthodox among themselves.
He
concluded by saying that these three historical examples are no parallels (Women,
Jews and Roman Catholics) but are examples where Orthodox theology must be open
to self-critique.
* * * * *
This afternoon taught me a lot. About Orthodox theology in general and about
Sankt Ignatios Foundation in particular.
