Prelude: Setting the Stage (Part I of IX)
At the beginning of the summer of 2000, for various reasons which I have explored elsewhere, I began to take a serious look at the Orthodox Church. I come from a non-denominational ("independent") conservative evangelical Protestant background. In part because of a longing for a real, tangible connection to the New Testament Church which my upbringing had taught me to seek and to make a reality in my own day, I began to explore within the historic Church the disciplines of the monastic orders, the daily office and liturgy. In the course of my exploration, over some five years, I looked seriously, if only briefly, at the Roman Church, but soon focused my attention on the Anglican Communion, and the Episcopal Church here in the States. Because of my strong Protestant sensibilities, and because of the historic ties of Anglicanism to apostolic origins, the liturgies, and the sacraments, the Episcopal Church made a lot of sense to me, and I was confirmed at the hands of Bishop Peter Beckwith on 14 April 1996. My parish priest, Fr. Jim Cravens, was my sponsor.
Beginning in 2000, I began to have misgivings about certain issues in the Episcopal Church, but I was also pursuing ordination. So, as an aspirant, I began to attend an Episcopal seminary. My experiences there, in the space of about three months, were the catalyst for me to reignite my previous search for the historic Church and a way to find tangible connections to it. Orthodoxy was my only other option. I began to read a dozens of books, popular and scholarly, on Orthodoxy, especially several books describing the testimonies of various Jews, agnostics and atheists, Roman Catholics, and Protestants of diverse varieties, and how they came to be baptized or chrismated into the Orthodox Church.
On 23 July 2000, I worshipped for the first time at All Saints Orthodox Church. In the ensuing three years, it has become my home parish. I am not yet Orthodox, not having yet been chrismated. But here is a list of reasons why I want to be.
[Please note: Speaking as I must about my previous and present church experiences in light of my attraction to Orthodoxy, I must necessarily and frequently take up a critical stance to many aspects of these experiences. But I have also tried to offer honest and heartfelt positive appraisals where I can.]
Next: 1. Honoring the Past (Part II of IX)
I'm with you so far. Just wondering what flavor of Orthodoxy we're talking here... Orthodox Presbyterian, Greek Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Russian Orthodox? These are the only flavors I could come up with off the top of my head.
Posted by: ColeSlaw at October 5, 2003 12:44 PMCS:
Eastern Orthodox (inclusive of Greek, Russsian, Antiochian, etc.).
I didn't realize that they were all under the same umbrella. I'm assuming that the following will be covered in later installments of Why O...? but if not I'm curious.
I grew up Catholic; saved in a PCA church went to a PCA school and now I'm going to a Baptist church. My brain hurts just thinking about it all. But seriously. How does the Orthodox hierarchy work? I know the system of dioceses(sp?) in RC and I know the Presbytery thing but what do the Orthodox do about church govmt.?
If I'm remembering Doctrine Class I think they had at one point a system of bishops split over some sort of districts. Was/Is that the case? I think they balked at the idea of papacy, true?
Posted by: ColeSlaw at October 6, 2003 01:50 PMIn terms of faith, practice, intercommunion, and so forth, yes, they are all the same. Normally, Orthodox Church have been organized according to national/ethnic boundaries. Thus the Greek Orthodox Church, the Russian Orthodox Church, and so on. Though there are minor differences in terms of (little-t) traditions (such as the stringency with which fasts are maintained, calendar use, and so on), but complete agreement in terms of (capital-T) Tradition (the belief about Christ, the Trinity, the Mysteries and so on).
Here in the U. S., however, due to the historical accidents of immigration, the various national churches maintained separate jurisdictions. So, instead of a single American Orthodox Church, there are the the archioceses for Greeks, Serbians, Antiochians, and so on. Intercommunion normally takes place among these groups (for instance, I was visiting an Antiochian parish in El Paso in June, and one of the members of the parish council was technically a member of the Orthodox Church of America--formerly the Russian Metropolia). And there are strong lay movements among the jurisdictions that would like to see formal union among all the jurisdictions into a single American Orthodox Church. To that end an common synod of the metropolitans/archbishops of the various jurisdictions came about a few decades ago, and has assumed a much larger role in recent years.
There are still difficulties, of course, and this is technically an uncanonical situation, but the efforts toward a unified American Orthodox Church is going forward, and may be seen in our lifetime.
These difficulties, however, do not affect the reality of the essential unity of all the Orthodox Churches in the U. S. and around the globe.
Think Itallian Catholics and Irish Catholics. Same church, some different songs and very different foods at the parades. :-)
Posted by: Huw Raphael at October 8, 2003 07:59 AMclifton, are you still in el paso? i grew up there and visit a couple times a year...i'd be interested in meeting sometime if you're still there.
Posted by: larson at March 18, 2005 09:10 PM