Orthodox theology, peace and democracy

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.