Eastern Orthodoxy

In recent years, many evangelicals have turned to Eastern Orthodoxy (hereafter EO). They are taken by the ethereal experiences of worship services: incense, music, icons, liturgies. For instance, Frankie Schaeffer—son of famous evangelical Francis Schaeffer—converted to EO in 1990. Other evangelicals have done the same, claiming to find more mystery and awe in the EO faith.

Origin of Eastern Orthodoxy

Officially, EO split from Roman Catholicism in 1054—though a rift occurred as early as the fourth century, when Constantine relocated the capital of the Empire to Constantinople. The capital of EO was Constantinople (in the east) and the capital of Roman Catholicism was Rome (in the west). For this reason, sometimes these two denominations are called “eastern” and “western” Christianity.

Two sources for sacred truth: Scripture and Tradition

EO places a high priority on church tradition. They hold that the seven emperor initiated church councils are authoritative (from Nicea in AD 325 to the seventh council also held in Nicea). They call themselves the “church of the seven councils.”

The 1962 Almanac of the Greek Archdiocese of North and South America explains, “Eternal truths are expressed in the Holy Scripture and the Sacred Tradition, both of which are equal and are represented pure and unadulterated by the true Church established by Christ to continue His mission: man’s salvation.” Archbishop Michael (of the Greek Archdiocese of North and South America) writes, “There exists in Tradition elements which, although not mentioned in the New Testament as they are in the Church today, are indispensable to the salvation of our souls.” He goes on to say that the oral tradition was codified in the seven ecumenical councils by the church fathers. Moreover, Theodore Stylianopoulos writes, “The Church is the foundational reality behind both scripture and tradition.”

Evangelical interpreters argue that tradition has a helpful role in building up the church. That is, we can learn much from how believers have tried to fulfill the Great Commission in the past, and how they interpreted Scripture. That is, each generation doesn’t need to rewrite their systematic theology from scratch! Each generation should build on the body of work from previous centuries.

However, church tradition is not authoritative (see “Sola Scriptura” and “Interpreting Scripture”). Craig Blaising critiques the EO view of tradition by writing, “For all practical purposes, this means that church tradition is not correctible by Scripture. Rather Scripture is ruled by Tradition, which defines its message and application.” Blaising notes that the Church was founded on the apostles and prophets—not their successors (Eph. 2:20). The apostles also warned that false teachers would arise from within the church (Acts 20:28-32; 2 Tim. 3:1-4: 8; 2 Pet. 1:1-2: 3; 3:1-18).

Icons

Icons play a major role in EO, because humans are the “icon” (or “image”) of God. The iconostasis is a wall of “paintings that separates the sanctuary from the nave.” When the priest enters the church, he kisses each of the icons on the wall.

Historically, the western church considered this idolatry—namely, worshipping something other than God. Thus Emperor Leo III opposed icons as idolatry in the eighth century AD. Iconoclasts (“image-breakers”) whitewashed the icons.

Evangelicals currently reject iconography based on Scripture. For instance, Peter refused to be worshipped because he was “just a man” (Acts 10:26). Likewise, Paul and Barnabas refused to be worshipped, tearing their clothes at the thought of it (Acts 14:12-15). Blaising writes, “Just as surely as we are not to focus on ourselves as the living Church today, neither are we to focus our worship on dead saints.” Technically, the Second Council of Nicaea prohibits worshipping icons, but Blaising writes, “The supposed distinction may sometimes be too subtle for actual practice.”

Sin and justification

Sin isn’t a legal concept in EO. Instead, sin is the distortion of the image of God in us. Shelley writes, “According to Orthodoxy when man sins he does not violate the divinely established legal relationship between God and man (a dominant image in Catholicism and Protestant teaching); he reduces the divine likeness; he inflicts a wound in the original image of God.” Citing 1 Corinthians 15:47-48, John Meyendorff writes, “The opposition between the two Adams is seen in terms not of guilt and forgiveness but of death and life.”

While evangelicals understand the solution to sin as justification, EO calls this process theosis. Theosis is not the notion that humans can become God. Instead, this is probably more akin to the evangelical view of sanctification and glorification. That is, the process by which we become like God in his moral nature. John Meyendorff writes, “The man Jesus is God hypostatically, and, therefore, in Him there is a ‘communication’ (perichoresis—circumincessio) of the ‘energies’ divine and human. This ‘communication’ also reaches those who are ‘in Christ.’ But they, of course, are human hypostases, and are united to God not hypostatically but only ‘by grace’ or ‘by energy.’”

While the mystical union of believers is a spiritual reality, this is grasped through our justification in Christ. We cannot put the cart before the horse. Michael Horton writes, “Any view of union and recapitulation that denies that the sole basis for divine acceptance of sinners is the righteousness of Christ and that the sole means of receiving that righteousness is imputation through faith alone apart from works is a denial of the gospel.”

As a result of these views, EO places a high view on the role of works in our salvation. Father Callinicos writes, “Faith in Christ without good works is not enough to save us. Good works by themselves are also not sufficient. Our salvation will be the outcome of a virtuous life permeated and sealed by the inestimable blood of the Only-begotten Son of God.” For an evangelical perspective, see “Do Good People Go to Heaven?”

Theology proper

Eastern Orthodoxy holds more to a mysterious view of God’s attributes and nature. This is called the “negative way,” wherein theologians can speak of what God is not, but human language and reason can never really speak of what God is. Humans can connect with the divine energies through the sacraments. Evangelicals do not believe that human language can capture God’s nature or attributes fully, but it can capture it truly (see “The Attributes of God”).

Russian orthodoxy

EO expresses itself in different cultures in different ways. The Russian manifestation bases itself in Moscow. Shelley writes, “Over the years Russia made the aesthetic glories of Orthodox Christianity her own. Gradually Moscow came to see herself as the leader of the Orthodox world. A theory developed that there had been one Rome, in Italy, that had fallen to the barbarians and to the Roman Catholic heresy. There had been a second Rome: Constantinople. And when that fell to the Turks, there was a third Rome: Moscow. The emperor took his title from the first Rome—Tzar is the same word as Caesar—just as he had taken his religion from the second. Even in recent decades the Kremlin has stood as a reminder of the rich and inspiring past. The onion domes of Orthodoxy’s former glory remain and point toward heaven.”

Further Reading

Horton, Michael, Bradley Nassif, Vladimir Berzonsky, George Hancock-Stefan, and Edward Rommen. Three Views on Eastern Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2004.

Negrut, Paul. “Searching for the True Apostolic Church: What Evangelicals Should Know About Eastern Orthodoxy.” Christian Research Journal. Volume 20, number 3, 1998.

Plummer, Robert L.; Ellsworth, Wilbur; Beckwith, Francis J.; Castaldo, Chris A.; Dorsett, Lyle W.; Blaising, Craig A.; Allison, Gregg; Gregory, Brad S.; Peterson, Robert A. Journeys of Faith: Evangelicalism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholicism and Anglicanism. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. 2012.