Orthodox Denomination Research Articles

Jan Paweł II i Benedykt XVI a dialog katolicko-prawosławny. Przyczynek do dyskusji

For centuries the dialogue between the Catholic and Orthodox churches has been marked by disputes and conflicts. It was impossible, and still remains troublesome, to clearly identify the reasons for this. Some tend to blame the Vatican for its excessively ‘obtrusive’ intention to establish its hierarchy in the East. Others tend to claim that it is the Russian Orthodox Church that has triggered conflicts in its pursuit to unify the Orthodox churches and ‘dethrone’ the Roman Catholic Church. The Catholic and Orthodox denominations have mainly been clashing in Central and Eastern Europe, where new factors generating conflicts are constantly emerging, whether religious or – more frequently – political (e.g. the historical conflict between Catholic Poland and Lithuania and Orthodox Russia; or the establishment of Catholic dioceses in the Russian Federation, which the Moscow Patriarchate considers to be the canonical territory of the Eastern Church). Sometimes it may even seem that the dissenting denominations do not even try to communicate. The pontificate of John Paul II was ecumenical, but it did not produce the results the Vatican would consider desirable with respect to the Orthodox Church. At present we can observe slow changes in the behavior of religious leaders – Benedict XVI and the Patriarchs of Moscow (Alexii II, followed by Cyril I). The authors of the paper present selected issues in Catholic-Orthodox dialogue during the pontificate of John Paul II and the present Pope – Benedict XVI, and they attempt to answer the question of what changes have recently taken place in the mutual relations of the two denominations, and whether the steps taken stand a chance of resulting in a permanent conciliation.

ECUMENISM AND ETHOPHYLISM THE VIEW OF ORTODOX CHRISTIANS

Despite being obviously contradictory to each other, a common question is spelled by both ecumenism and ethnophilysm. How the unity is to be achieved by Christian people? How one could come to lifetime friendship with all those having diff erent beliefs or with those not having any belief at all? That very unity means togetherness in God, and not an agreement based on minimum concordance. Thus, such unity is to be realized in respective church’s community where all nations and all people are called up. In that sense, ecumenism merits its full sense within church’s authenticity of dialogue between diff erent ones, as well as within creative communication of all those who would like to achieve and edify themselves through church. However, there are certain obstrictions and drawbacks which could be superseded only when we all become part of togetherness in beatifi c love of God, which is fully come out as Blessed Empire of Father and Son and Holly Spirit, with “no Greeks, neither Jews, but Christ is all in everything”. In this way, we are all winning and nobody is defeated or dismissed – we are all materialized as “one man in Christ”. An undeniable rule here is that “higher” should serve “lower”, and that implies disposition and order. Therefore, Orthodox Christians are the most responsible side in ecumenical dialogue in which all participants should be welcomed witnessing salutary joyfulness. Thus, all nations and all people are jointly realized in Christ’s love. The diff erences are clear and they are not inessential – but, such diff erences should not be the reason unnegotiable confl icts. Here, the tolerance is just the beginning of realization, while all is replenished in vivid and living love. In addition to this theological standpoint, there are social and political reasons for putting the faith into function of substantiation of peace, justice and truth in life. The responsibility of all those who believe should be factor of integration in all human relations, and not reason for upsets, intolerance and confl icts between various and diff erent creeds. By its particular quality, the religion excludes intolerance, tyranny, slavery, servitude, fear and selfi shness. The religion means that one is ready to understand everybody, since it is not and it should not be grouping of those having same ideas. The religion is constant readiness in benefi cence – in diff erent case, there is no religion despite nominal conformity of individuals to certain community. Only when believer has introspected whole heaviness, he is to understand the strength of faith. And, that is to be confi rmed by his benevolence to everybody. The ecumenism is confi rmation of our common benevolence, while ethnophilysm shows that we stand just at the beginning – but, one should set out forward. Only in that way all of us would reach the end despite the fact that we are on diff erent paths, pathways and winding footpaths... This responsibility is on all Christians, and particularly on those who emphassize their orthodox denomination. Nobody should be afraid of this, nobody should traduce this, and nobody should leave this to negligence. We are all supposed to do our best, while God always replenish by mulitplying to no-end and infi nity. And, in such way, everything really becomes new, unlimitedly new – we all become good forever without giving up, we all become persevering in love.

Tire Müzesi'nden M.S. 5.-7. Yüzyıllara Ait Kandiller

M.S.5. yüzyıl Gotlar sorunu(1), Hun tehlikesi ve dini mücadelelerle geçmiştir. Gerçi Gotlar sorunu yeni değildi. Ephesos kenti M.S. 3. yüzyılda Gotların saldırısına uğramış, ama kendini toparlamıştı(2). Zenon zamanında Gotlar bertaraf edilmiş, onların yerini İzaurialılar almıştı(3). M.S. 5. yüzyıl sonu-6. yüzyıl başlarında Bulgarlar ve İslavlar Makedonya, Teselya ve Trakya'ya kadar akınlarını devam ettirerek etrafı yağma ve talan ediyorlardı. Doğuda da İranlılar Erzurum ve Diyarbakır'ı geçici bir süre için işgal ettiler. Ayrıca din kavgaları sert bir biçimde devam etti.

National Religious Context and Familial Religiosity within a Jewish Framework

Kelley and De Graaf studied the relationship between national and familial religiosity in 15 Christian societies. They found that secular people living in religious societies acquire more orthodox Christian beliefs than similar persons living in secular societies do. We examine whether their findings can be extended to societies that are not Christian by contrasting Jewish religiosity in the United States with Jewish religiosity in Israel. Extensive surveys of American and Israeli Jews enable us to examine the impact of similar and dissimilar societal religious contexts. The survey data indicate that the overall religious level of Israeli society is on a par with the United States. We find that there is an interaction effect. On the whole, Israeli Jewry has an enhanced level of religiosity which is higher than that of American Jews, even for those who belong to the American Orthodox denomination. Israeli secular Jews are found to acquire enhanced religiosity characteristics from their surrounding majority Jewish society. Secular American Jews do acquire Christian religiosity traits and display religious service attendance levels considerably below that of their surrounding Christian society.

Women in a Divided Church: Liberal and Conservative Catholic Women Negotiate Changing Gender Roles

The Catholic Church in America is deeply divided, and gender issues (especially reproductive choice and women's ordination) have become a symptom of this division. This paper examines the language used by liberal and conservative Catholic women to talk about gender. It is argued that although similar divisions over gender exist within Protestantism and Judaism, Catholic women are in a unique position to confront them. Unlike conservative Protestants and Jews who have separated themselves from their more liberal counterparts by forming independent Evangelical and Orthodox denominations, conservative Catholics co-exist with liberals in the same church. The paper shows that being forced to confront those divisions has resulted in a tendency towards polarization on the one hand, and towards moderation on the other, both of which have important implications for the future of the Catholic Church.

Americans in the Israeli Reform and Conservative Denominations: Religiosity under an Ethnic Shield?

Most American Jews migrate to Israel because of a personal desire to lead a fuller Jewish life. Only a small percentage of them join a Reform or Conservative congregation in their new society. To some extent, the Jewish nature of Israel supplants the need for affiliation with these religious movements. Those persons who join these religious denominations are committed to a liberal religious orientation that they feel is lacking in Orthodoxy. Seeking acceptance by Israeli society, these persons do not justify their religious "deviance" from what is in Israel the "legitimate" Orthodox denomination by adopting a "foreign" ethnic group identity. However, they do take pride in their American ethnic cultural identity that they see as innovative and progressive and as a forerunner of religious change in Israel.