Trinity College

Orthodox Life II: Eastern Christian Understanding of Ethics, Society and the World

Course Code: 
Last Offered: 
Winter/Spring 2021
Next Offered: 
Winter/Spring 2024


Eastern Christian theology is all-too-often thought of as having its primary concern for formal issues: dogmatics and doctrine, liturgy, iconography, and so on. But in fact, Eastern Christian theology has only one primary purpose – the divinization of life itself – and the East-Christian world-outlook embraces all those formal fields, not merely as intellectual resources for illuminating the Truth, but rather as necessary knowledge framing and making possible the life of the soul on its path to God. In this understanding, the primary reason for the gift of life – life which is the eschaton of Creation – is so all that lives within the framework of Creation can reveal, witness, incorporate within itself, the Holy.

This understanding is not to be perceived or grasped as an abstraction, a concept. It is not an idea found by intellection, nor is it a transcendental inner state of another-worldly kind. The holy life is a life of praxis, lived in the world, in the person’s own time, own circumstances, own society with its conditions and circumstances. For this reason, holiness cannot be defined or described by any single set of precepts or rules of behaviour; it consists entirely in a dialogue between God-who-is-Holy and persons – persons fully in the ecclesia and persons not; every person is called to holiness – whose life must be carried on in their own world and time; the holy person attends to his/her holy dialogue with God and extends it outward into behaviour and relationships and decisions and management which witness that holiness in the contemporary world. Eastern Christians are not called to “leave the world” or this present life; they are called to be saints within it. They are not called out of their culture; they are called to bless it. This is true for all; whether laity or clergy or monks all live in the world, and their life is a process of discovery of the true divine oikonomia which makes possible life-saving decisions within the frame of God’s plan for salvation (Eph 1:9-10). All Eastern Christians, even monastics, are expected to approach life in the world with decisiveness, “discerning the spirits” (1 John 4:1, cf. 1 Cor 12:10, 1 Th 5:21-2) and acting as good stewards of Creation and as saintly icons of morals and faith.

However, this very commitment to finding and revealing holiness in life carries within itself the seeds of a fundamental challenge: the holy life can only be experienced through encounter, engagement with the world as it is. Holiness may need to make judgments and value-based decisions about what is “real” in the world, but it can never deny that the world is real; the engagement of holy persons is carried on within society and the world-environment. But Life-experience has always recognized Life-in-the-world as “messy” and complex, requiring constant judgment and decision, often from a position of competing social goods or values. Life-in-the-world moves ever-onward through the unpredictable  turnings of war and peace, economic fluctuation, cultural shifts in values, births and deaths, illnesses and aging, elections, population movements and demographic shifts, coups-d’état and revolutions, environmental changes, shifts in scientific knowledge and philosophical discoveries, civil court decisions about “rights,” and even falling in love. Is Orthodox Tradition, as learned through Eastern Christian living and as examined and reviewed in the Orthodox/Eastern Christian Program, a sound – and effective -- basis upon which to ground the constant judgment and decision-making which Life-in-the-world requires? Is the dialogue with God which Eastern Christian theology provides sufficient to cope with the challenge of Life-in-the-World, or must a holy person incorporate into the dialogue something of the truths and values of the world?  Can we evaluate bioethics without a knowledge of science? Can we evaluate “spiritual growth” without an understanding of psychology? Can we love our neighbour if we understand nothing of his culture? Praxis is the conduct of a life through making decisions; does Orthodox knowledge and faith provide a sound basis for wise – and holy – deciding? What is the true relationship between what God needs of us and what social need places four-square before our eyes?

These questions are perennial, facing everyone who has ever tried to live in the world while walking with God. But our own time and our own place have made this situation even more difficult, for everyone but especially for Eastern Christians with their strong appeal to Tradition. The 20th and 21st centuries have thrust into the center of “reality” many issues of existentialism, pluralism of ethical values, relativity of cultures, and so on, all playing out against dramatic shifts in environment, biotechnology, religious pluralism, overcoming of old prejudices, and so on, all of which together dramatically shift the ground from under the feet of confident certitude – in fact, even challenging the possibility of certitude itself.  And the social and legal environment of Canadian and US culture and “secular” democracy, grounded in notions of rights, toleration, and separation of religion from the state, makes the grasp of proper decisions and the application of religious truths to the social dynamic even harder to sort out.

Students in this course will have an opportunity, through discussions of many concrete issues of our times, to evaluate these profound issues of the problems of living in a social world and the deeper issue of what applicability their Eastern Christian knowledge has in providing a foundation for meaningful solutions to those Life-problems, and by what methods this knowledge might be made to work in ways that are respectful of the realities of the world.

In Orthodox Life I we followed an opening overview of the dilemma of ethical decision-making with a set of problems which touch on personal self-recognition. In Orthodox Life II this is now followed by consideration of problems which stem from persons’ need to live in greater society and  in socio-political relationships. The central issue in both cases is the same: How can meaningful solutions be found for these key Life-problems which are at once practically useful and provide a true Christian witness? Scripture tells Orthodox Christians that there can be no compromise with the world; Orthodox praxis tells them that every life-decision engages oikonomia – merciful understanding of the problems of life in a way which keeps strict faith with Holy Tradition and also seeks a humanly possible, Anthropology-respecting, solution to a problem. For Eastern Christians, oikonomia plays a major role in preaching, in ethics, in the correction of sinners, even in canon law; yet the parameters of “oeconomic” judgment have yet to receive an adequate definition. Indeed, as said above, in the 21st century a single-valued definition may no longer even be possible – so how is an “oeconomic” decision to be reached?

Specific topics in Orthodox Life II

Among topics to be considered will be the following; in every case we will be discussing how an Orthodox believer with an educated grounding in the Orthodox Tradition would approach and defend stances on questions such as:

  • Issues of church and state: The political theories and practices of Orthodoxy were formed in close symbiotic relation with a monarchical state; how should Orthodoxy function in the modern “secular” state, especially in socially pluralistic democracies? In societies where Orthodoxy is the major church, should it seek Establishment? Should the Church take stands on political issues, and in democracies – especially those dependent on constitutionalized “rights” – what principles should motivate voting in elections, or voting on laws by legislators? What is the meaning of “nationalistic” prayers? Can an Orthodox world-view provide a basis for recognition of the “correct” stance in questions of “civil rights”? Or “universal human rights”? Does Eastern Christianity acknowledge “Natural Law”?
  • Wealth, social care, and charity: Does the Orthodox worldview entail any particular form(s) of social order? What is the Scriptural, and the patristic basis for understanding social disparities, especially economic disparities? And what is the appropriate Christian response? The gospel of love leaves no room for doubt about the priority of charity and care for the poor, but for the Orthodox worldview, what is the appropriate stewardship, the useful form of such charity, in the modern world? Can the parables of “labourers” and “stewards,” whose exegesis in Scripture applies to evangelism, be equally well applied to socio-economic issues? What values should be connected with “wealth,” and how does wealth relate to financing the churches and charity? How does this social issue affect our understanding of Christian Anthropology?
  • The environment: To what extent is concern for the environment and ecological consciousness a grounded priority in Orthodox awareness and outlook? What are the patristic and Scriptural bases for this view? In particular, is vigorous and activist environmentalism defensible as synergy with the energies of the creative Trinity, and not just as pragmatic self-protection? Are ethics toward animals, or toward all life, an environmental issue, a bio-ethical issue, or an extension of general ethics? How does this environmental outlook change our understanding of Christian anthropology?
  • War and peace: Orthodox history and many texts in Orthodox liturgy present what at first glance seems to be a highly triumphalist, military-based reading of the Scriptural intention for an eschatological Christian world; in light of the dialogue between Orthodox Tradition and the world we live in, is this a justifiable exegesis – does Orthodoxy support the notion of a “just war”? How should we respond to a world where there is so much international lawlessness and violent crime against humanity? What message should orthodox military chaplains bring to their evangelism? What understanding does hagiography contribute to this question?
  • Missions, missiology, and diversity of cultures: In light of modern multiculturalism, on what basis should Orthodox carry out mission and evangelism? In what terms, with what language should Orthodox speak to non-Orthodox? Is it justifiable to evangelize other Christians?  How much of Orthodox praxis -- especially liturgical rubrics – must be conveyed in outreach to other cultures? What about the special cases of liturgical language and ethnic uniformity in an Orthodox community?
  • Relationship to non-Christians; multifaith activities: Extending the issues of pluralism of values, democratic rights, and diversity of cultures into a “global” Christian Anthropology, how should Orthodox in the 21st C. live and interact with neighbours of other religions? In what ways is it appropriate – or even an obligatory priority – for Orthodox to join with such neighbours in common activities for the welfare of God’s world, and what form should such activities take? Do Orthodox Christians have a unique and different response, or a common “human” response, to situations of disaster or human need? Is there room for interfaith marriage?