A Call for Righteousness over Orthodoxy

Orthodoxy and Wesleyan Scriptural Understanding and Practice

“I sit down alone: only God is here; in His presence
I open and read this book to find the way to heaven”
– John Wesley

Our search for the theological and practical connection between Pentecostalism and Eastern Orthodoxy continues with yet another publication by St. Vladimir’s Press titled, Orthodox and Wesleyan Scriptural Understanding and Practice. The book represents an ongoing dialogue between the Orthodox and Wesleyan confessions and it emphasizes how theologians from both sides are attempting to discover commonalities in theology and praxis. To come together, not so much as theologians and thinkers, but as practical doers motivated by the proper interpretation of Scripture. As observed from the title, as well as through the text, these similarities are not necessarily in theological convictions, but in the proceeding Biblical approach toward interpretation of Scripture.

Orthodox and Wesleyan Scriptural Understanding and Practice is a compilation of essays from the Second Consultation on Orthodox and Wesleyan Spirituality under the editorship in 2000 of S.T. Kimbrough, Jr., who contributed the chapter on Charles Wesley’s’ Lyrical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. I must issue the caution that the book is not an easy read. But it is by no means a book to be easily passed by Pentecostal scholars searching for the Biblical roots of Pentecostalism within the Eastern Orthodoxy.

The book begins with an interesting observation of the exegesis of the Cappadocian Fathers by John A. McGuckin, and continues with an article on the spiritual cognition of my personal favorite, Simeon the New Theologian by Theodore Stylianopoulos. Although the discussion on Gregory the Theologian, Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa was thoughtful and presented in an interesting manner, the essay on St. Simeon struck me as well structured, but somewhat shallow.

An interesting approach was taken in Tamara Grdzelidze’s essay where she presented an orthodox perspective of the Wesleyan position on authority of scriptural interpretation. The essay had a very strong exposition in regard to the Wesleyan understanding of the importance of Scripture in Christian living. The latter part, which dealt with the influence of tradition, however was not investigated to its full capacity, which left the text (perhaps on purpose) open to multiple interpretations. Nevertheless, this issue was resolved later in the book by Ted Campbell that dealt with the subject from the Wesleyan perspective.

A central theme throughout the book was the comparison of prayers and song lyrics from both camps. Although I am no musical expert, I must agree with the authors when they say that theology in music has played an important role in both Orthodox and Wesleyan traditions. Music continues to be important in the everyday spiritual experience of the Pentecostal believer. This rather practical approach seemed to be the heart of the discussion where both sides could agree.

Finally, the role of the Holy Spirit is viewed as central for the reading, understanding and practicing of Scripture in both the Orthodox and Wesleyan traditions. For the Pentecostal reader, it may be easy to accept this presumption as similar to the Pentecostal experience, yet the book describes it in terms which will be somewhat foreign to many Pentecostals. Similarities between these interpretations of Scripture may be self-explanatory for the western Pentecostal reader. But due to the ever-present tension between Orthodox and Protestant denominations, those in an Eastern European context may disregard these similarities. But even if the Pentecostal scholar gathers nothing else from this book, they must recognize that the time has come for a formal Orthodox-Pentecostal dialogue, like the one which the World Council of Churches has been trying to put together since 1991.

Departures from Orthodoxy and Ministry Implications

Dony K. Donev, D.Min.: Eastern Pneumotology Lectures

Eastern Orthodoxy can be expressed in one word: theism. The purpose and meaning of life is to become more like God. Deification is pursued by all means of human existence. This quest for divine likeness often includes the typical for the Eastern Church, speculation on the divinity and humanity of Christ, traditions on the doctrine of the Trinity and non-traditional mystical experiences. They appear in the context of both physical and spiritual characteristics in individual and corporate ecclesiastical environment. The role of the Spirit in the process of deification is threefold and involves: creation, re-creation and theism. Eastern Pneumotology follows the graduate process of theism development. The Spirit is involved in the original creation of the world as well as the new-birth experience. His work however, does not end there, but continues throughout the process of personal deification of the believer.

Departures from Orthodoxy

And thus, we arrive at the point of departure from Orthodoxy. Similar to Eastern Pneumotology, this departure can be expressed in one word, dualism. A prime example of the dualistic heresy is the Messalian movement. Arising around AD 360 in Edessa, the Messalians are described as polytheistic. They believe that every human creature has a personal demon, and that Satan and the Holy Spirit together can dwell in the individual. The believers receive a share of the divine Spirit and become equal to God in their incapability to sin.[1]  Interesting enough, the Messalians are highly feministic allowing their women to the top of the ecclesiastical hierarchy.

A similar movement arises under the name Paulicians. Due to the mass persecution through which the Paulicians go, the preserved documents about their existence in history are limited. We do know that they appeared in Armenia and the Byzantium Empire. The final trace of Eastern dualism is in on the Balkans, and more particular in Bulgaria under the name Bogomils. 18[2]

Ministry Implications

The next three brief ministerial applications are inspired and drown from the above research on the experiences of the Oriental Orthodox. They are taken in chronological order in its direct context of Pentecostal practices.

1. Prayer is the constantly present element through which pneumatic and mystical experiences in the East are obtained. For example, Pallamas reports that the gifts of the Spirit are obtained only through intense mental prayer, which is often accompanied with tears. [3] In the same charismatic context Cassian concludes that after a season the gifts will disappear. My personal implication is that this is precisely the season when prayer and have become strange to the church, and when tears have become are sign of weekends rather than a sign of humility in the presence of the Almighty God. Unfortunately, at the end of the twentieth century, this is precisely our general present satiation.
2. Peace of Heart: Hazzaya gives five practical signs for recognition of the works of the Holy Spirit: (1) love of God burns within the heart of the believer, (2) growth in humility of the soul, (3) kindness to all people, (4) true love and (5) vision of mind. His main tool to recognize demons and demonic visions from God and divine revelations is the peace of heart, which follows the heavenly presence.[4] I am persuaded that today the rule of the peace of heart is still true in the hearing of the voice of God.
3. Return, reclaim and preservation: The Armenian faith practices focus on preservation of the apostolic doctrines and habits.[5] Symeon the New Theologian also calls for a return to a radical living of the Gospel.[6] In a similar way, the early Church of God claimed to have as a main goal the reclaiming of the power of Pentecost; however, the church today has evolved to a structure that is quite far from this former idea. Furthermore, in this process the church has become too distinguished, replacing the primitivism of the Pentecostal experience with higher education, development programs, sophisticated structures, etc. And while a century ago we were the persecuted and ridiculed, now we are the people who reject and mock churches that carry the Pentecostal primitivism. Through this, we not only deny our historical relationship with them, but also abolish our Pentecostal heritage, which we often like to brag about.

Nevertheless, similar to the early Pentecostal movement, revival will not come to our churches through sophisticated worship liturgies, but rather through a genuine return to the initial Pentecostal experience. At the end of the twentieth century, simply reclaiming the power of Pentecostal is not sufficient. We need to preserve the Pentecostal primitivism in the reality of our present ecclesiastical setting. Only then we will be who we claim that we are.

[1] John of Damascus, De Haeresibus Compendio, 80, PS 3/1:col. clxxvi.

[2] Steven Runciman, The Medieval Manichee: A Study of the Christian Dualistic Heresy (Cambridge University Press, 1974), chapters 2, 4, and 5.

[3] Burgess, 52-53.

[4] Ibid., 173-74.

[5] Ibid., 113.

[6] Ibid., 62.

Bulgarian Orthodoxy in Crisis

July 25, 2004: Bulgaria should not allow religion and policy to be mixed, Parliamentary Speaker Ognyan Gerdhzikov said. In an interview for the private bTV channel Gerzdhikov said the new law used as a base for the July 21 church raids was voted in 2002 aiming to overcome the schism of the Bulgarian Church. Last Wednesday police stormed through 250 churches countrywide and detained many priests in a controversial raid to restore proprietorship of official Bulgarian Orthodox Church. Gerdzhikov pointed out that the Prosecutor’s order for the raid was legal, underlining, however, that the measures taken were not proper. The problem following the schism of the Bulgarian Church has established two Orthodox community centers, one headed by Patriarch Maxim and the other claiming he had been “appointed” by ex-communist regime.

July 24, 2004: Current arguments in the Bulgarian Church are due to real estate ownership according to Justice Minister Anton Stankov. Stankov explained that the police actions were legal. On July 21 police stormed through 250 churches countrywide and detained many priests in a controversial raid to restore proprietorship of official Bulgarian Orthodox Church. The problem following the schism of the Bulgarian Church has established two Orthodox community centers, one headed by Patriarch Maxim and the other claiming he had been “appointed” by ex-communist regime.

July 23, 2004: The Supreme Cassation Court initiated legal proceedings against the so-called Alternative Synod of Inokentiy. One of the charges is illegal possession of property. The case has been referred to the National Security Service. Meanwhile, Inkentiy and priests from his synod demanded the resignation of chief prosecutor Nikola Filchev because of his interference in church activities. The priests met with MPs. However, no MPs from the National Movement Simeon II (NMSII) and from the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) attended the meeting. Inokentiy said that he struggled for the churches, not for the church properties. Bulgarian ex PM and leader of Democrats for Strong Bulgaria Ivan Kostov read a declaration of the United Democratic Forces saying that some Bulgarian state institutions violate basic human rights and freedoms. MP from the NMSII Borislav Ralchev tried to deny the attacks against the Government saying that the issue was not about state interference in the church activities. “There is no alternative synod. There is just one synod of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church”, leader of the parliamentary faction of the New Time Miroslav Sevlievski said. The church, the Holy Synod and Bulgarian Patriarch Maxim have to decide on the solution of the problem, BSP MP Tatyana Doncheva said.

July 22, 2004: Priests from the dissident clergy headed by Metropolitan Inokentii served a mass in font of the Saint Sofia church in Bulgaria’s capital. The holy men protest against yesterday’s controversial police raids to restore proprietorship of official Bulgarian Orthodox Church. Later on Thursday representatives of the dissident clergy headed by Metropolitan Inokentii met with MPs from all Parliamentary Groups except for the Bulgarian socialists. The holy men urged for the resignation of Bulgaria’s Chief Prosecutor Nikola Filchev. Police stormed through 250 churches countrywide and detained many priests Wednesday. The problem following the schism of Bulgarian Church has established two Orthodox community centers, one headed by Patriarch Maxim and the other claiming he had been “appointed” by ex-communist regime.

July 21, 2004: Bulgarian policemen scuffle with a priest as they detain him Wednesday at St Parashkeva church in Sofia July. Police tried to force dissident clergy from 18 local churches in an escalating schism in Bulgarian Orthodox community. Police stormed through 250 churches countrywide and detained many priests Wednesday in a controversial raid to restore proprietorship of official Bulgarian Orthodox Church. The problem following the schism of Bulgarian Church, dating three years ago, has established two Orthodox community centers, one headed by Patriarch Maxim and the other claiming he had been “appointed” by ex-communist regime. In Sofia alone, priests were forcefully dragged out of 18 churches alongside present laypeople. The dissident clergy headed by Father Inokentii is determined to stay vigil in front of their churches until allowed back into them. arises.