We are delighted to publish a festive volume to the 70th anniversary of His Beatitude Daniel, Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church, with a series of highly scientific, highly topical and brisant articles by world-renowned theologians.
We thank His Excellency Bishop Dr. Gerhard Feige, President of the Commission for Ecumenical Relations of the German Bishops’ Conference, for the “Message of Greeting” (“Grußwort”) that opens the present volume.
The Festschrift “Holding fast to the Mystery of the Faith” is structured in four chapters. The first chapter focuses on “Theology of Creation, Spirituality, and Mission.” The world-famous Theologian of Hope, Jürgen Moltmann, from Germany, contributes here with an article about “The Ecological Turn in Christian Theology” (“Die Ökologische Wende in der christlichen Theologie”). In his introduction, Moltmann describes his first encounter with His Beatitude Patriarch Daniel, as early as 1979 at the Klingenthal Conferences on the Filioque. In the company of the great Romanian theologian Professor Dumitru Stăniloae, he convinced him that the insertion of the Filioque in the Nicene Creed is both superfluous and theologically damaging. Moltmann gratefully mentions the award of an honorary doctorate by the University of Iași in Romania and the Moldavian Cross in 2006 by His Beatitude, who at that time was Metropolitan of Moldova and Bukovina. The ecological crisis is a crisis of dominion thinking, as well as of the understanding of man as “dominium terrae”. Today we need a new understanding of nature, a new view of humanity, and a new experience of God’s life-giving Spirit “in creation.” Ecological questions are not only ethical questions, but also open up an ecological spirituality, i.e., an ecological turn of theology in its entirety.
His Eminence Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, Chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, Rector of the Ss Cyril and Methodius Theological Institute of Postgraduate Studies, Moscow, Russia, addresses the question of “beauty” in the theology and the life of the Church. His Eminence takes the way the attitude towards beauty evolved in the Soviet Union as a starting point. Then he develops the mystical, missionary, and ecclesial perspective of beauty, whose true vocation is to partake to the fullest extent of the true Beauty.
Andrew Louth, world-renowned and one of the leading patristic theologians of our time, Russian Orthodox archpriest and professor emeritus of Durham University, United Kingdom, entitled his contribution “Folly for Christ: a Prophetic Vocation for the 21st Century”. The vocation of the ‘holy fool’ or the ‘fool for Christ’s sake’ might seem a curious, even embarrassing quirk of the Orthodox Church. However, its origins can be found in monastic piety, with its keen sense of the danger that goes with a reputation for virtue. To avoid this, the holy fool adopts an appearance of folly, or more exactly madness, thus attracting abuse, and coming to find, especially among the Slavs, the freedom to speak ‘truth to power’. The idea of the holy fool can be traced back to early monastic sources (e.g., Palladius’ Lausiac History), and soon appears in hagiography. The vitae of St Symeon of Emesa and St Andrew the Fool become determinative for the tradition, which continued in Holy Russia.
John A. McGuckin, Archpriest of the Romanian Patriarchate, Nielsen Emeritus Professor of Byzantine Church History at Union Theological Seminary and Columbia University, in New York, and currently Professor of Early Christian Studies at the Faculty of Theology at Oxford University, England, sketches out in his article “Elder Basil of Poiana Mărului: The Forgotten Saint of the Philokalia” what little is known of the life of the Elder (St) Basil of Poiana Mărului, the spiritual mentor of St Paisius Velichovsky. From a brief review of his surviving writings, the author goes on to discuss the teaching of Elder Basil that impacted the renewal of the Jesus Prayer tradition in the 18th century Philokalic revival.
Torstein Theodor Tollefsen, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Oslo, Norway, develops in his paper “Why Should We Protect the Scolitantides Orion (The Chequered Blue)?” an argument for the protection of created beings, based on metaphysical insights taken from Dionysius the Areopagite and Maximus the Confessor. The author claims that a metaphysical framework is distinguished from a scientific worldview. Living and non-living entities have intrinsic value because God made them. The scale of being is continuous, and it is not up to us to tear it apart according to the human desire to use and exploit without limit. We have to achieve a consciousness of the sacred dimension of nature, and we need to balance our use in accordance with virtues. If orthodox liturgical practices have an ecological implication, this implication has no practical results if we are not taught concretely how it is to be applied in the lives we actually live.
In Michael Plathows’ (Heidelberg, Germany) paper “Spiritus Creator et Sanctificator: Ein Beitrag ökologischer verantworteter Spiritualität” (“Spiritus creator and Spiritus sanctificator. An essay about spirituality in ecological accountability”) we can read about the belief and the confession in the Triune God as the presupposition of spirituality in ecological accountability. This involves – in contrary to the “subject-object-splitting” (Descartes), grounding in man’s hybris – a personal relationship between God’s creational spirit, natural creation, and man’s faith in the creator. Spirituality, responsible for natural environment as God’s creation, is to be lived in thanking for the gifts of the “spiritus creator and sanctificator”, in penance and prayer for forgiveness in wounding and destroying God’s creation, in accountability for taking care of creation and creatures and – in all – in doxologically praising the spirit of the triune God in all life on the earth and in the cosmos.
Duncan Reid, former Dean of the United Faculty of Theology, within the Melbourne College of Divinity (now the University of Divinity), Australia, writes about “The Mission of the Church on Stolen Country: An Australian Perspective”. After an initial consideration of terminology, the essay sketches a little of the Australian Indigenous religious world and the contrasting world of ‘settler’ Australian culture. The former is characterised by, among other things, its antiquity, its perception of the sacred in Country and particular places, and – despite the coexistence of many Indigenous nations – its extensiveness across the whole continent. Settler culture in Australia is characterised by a tension between the heritage of the European Enlightenment and the image of Christ as an ideal, mediated through an Augustinian lens. Settler culture also carries the experience of displacement from homelands. The mission of the Church in Australia is then understood as a mission to a predominantly secular society conducted in dialogue with and attentiveness to the voices of Indigenous Australians.
The second chapter of the volume is entitled: “Social Ethics, Apophatic, and Contextual Theology.” Ingeborg Gabriel, Emeritus Professor for Social Ethics at the Faculty of Roman-Catholic Theology at Vienna University, Austria, reflects in her paper on “Kenosis and Krisis. Reflections on Christianity in Modernity as an Inculturation Sui Generis” on the highly contested relationship of Christianity and modernity, particularly political modernity. She defines it as a specific form of inculturation (sui generis) that requires a kenotic and critical Christian attitude. After demonstrating this by several historical examples (inculturation by St Paul and the Church fathers in the Graeco-Roman world, scholasticism in the Western medieval world) she highlights the meaning of Vatican II that initiated a new phase of inculturation into the modern world in the Roman-Catholic Church. Finally, she outlines the intellectual and practical endeavours and attitudes demanded for such an inculturation sui generis, i.e. an inculturation into partly post-Christian cultures, as the framework of Christian theology and social ethics.
Pierre Gissel (Lausanne, Switzerland) focuses on some of the strengths of Orthodoxy, comparing them with the Roman tradition and various modern challenges, with the stated intention of opening new perspectives on the theology, spirituality, and mission of the Church in the 21st century. The author’s personal refusal to relate to an isolated Christ is followed by an emphasis on the difference between theological and economical and the real stakes regarding the embodiment of Orthodoxy in the features of culture and history.
Markus Vogt, Full Professor (“Ordinarius”) of Christian Social Ethics at the Catholic Theological Faculty of the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich, Germany, understands in his contribution “Spiritualität in Krisenzeiten. Eine sozialethische Spurensuche nach Zusammenhängen von Glauben, Resilienz und gesellschaftlicher Transformation” the experience of crises as a starting point to ask in a new way about faith as a force that can create existential trust and hope. Crises put faith to the test about what really works in the face of personal and social challenges. The reflection on the meaning of the Christian Faith for resilience results in a socio-ethical approach to a “spirituality from below.” According to a guiding thesis of the article, the Church’s mission in the 21st century consists of making a “therapeutic” contribution to crisis management.
Alfons Brüning teaches Eastern Christianity (with a focus on Eastern Europe) at the Institute for Eastern Christian Studies at Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands. In his article “Translational Problems: ‘Apophatic Anthropology’ and Political-Social Concepts of Human Dignity in Orthodoxy” (“Übersetzungsprobleme: ‘Apophatische Anthropologie’ und politisch-soziale Konzepte von Menschenwürde in der Orthodoxie“), he underlines that only recently the Orthodox Churches of the East displayed a more deliberate interest in the development of social ethics. Recent decades have seen the release of several partly highly innovative, somewhat controversial central documents concerning questions such as Church and state, church and society, environment, war and peace, and the like. One particular challenge, hitherto neglected in methodological terms, concerns the need to translate genuinely spiritual and theological sentences into the terminology applied by economics, social and political sciences or secular philosophy. The article examines related problems on the example of theological anthropology, looking at a path that would lead from traditional images of the human as “created in the image of God” towards socially and politically applicable concepts of “human dignity”. As illustrated, also within Eastern Christianity, there exist several partly contradictory concepts, with different consequences for the social and political spheres. Among those, the Orthodox approach of an “apophatic anthropology” seems to offer particular value for current discussion within Orthodox theology and beyond.
Daniel Munteanu writes in his article “Apophatic Theology and Spirituality in Postmodernity” (“Apophatische Theologie und Spiritualität in der Postmoderne”) about today’s real return of apophatic theology to religious attention, to theological and even postmodern discourse. Apophatic knowledge refers to the iconic aspect of reality and language. Language has a community-building, identity-conferring and connective function. It reveals the intersubjective and communicative nature of the world and truth. Language is a kind of “first philosophy” and a “relative apriori” through which we perceive the world. It is through the sociality of language that a person obtains the horizon of his or her consciousness and worldview. Apophatic theology itself constitutes such a linguistic articulation and serves as a linguistic, connective horizon of meaning. Munteanu analyses the apophatic ethos of Orthodoxy and distinguishes between a vertical and a horizontal apophatic. There is not only a perspective of deepening and sinking, i.e. a vertical apophatic/anchoring, but also a horizontal apophatic which points to the apophatic hidden in the cataphatic. The concept deep apophatics proposed here is intended to strengthen historical-social responsibility. Deep apophatics releases creative impulses and awakens ecological and socio-ethical responsibility as well as the awareness of the “profound worldliness of Christianity” (D. Bonhoeffer). An orthodox public theology lives from deep apophatics. The term apophatic pastoral refers to the apophatic foundation of any Christian rationality of action (Handlungsrationalität).
Athanasios N. Papathanasiou writes about “Orthodox Theology’s First Encounter with Contextual Theologies: Niko Nissiotis’ Pioneering Approach to Truth, Tradition, Witness, and Praxis”. Nikos Nissiotis (1924–1986) was an important Orthodox theologian and protagonist in the ecumenical movement. This paper examines his pioneering contribution to the dialogue between Orthodox theology and Contextual Theologies (Liberation Theology, Feminist Theology, Black Theology, etc.). He was one of the few Orthodox familiar with them from their inception in the late 1960s. He welcomed them in a positive and, at the same time, critical way. What is not yet widely known is that he played a decisive role in the very genesis of their name. The paper results from research in anecdotal archival material and the bibliography.
Fr Chad Hatfield, President of St Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, USA, recalls in his contribution Fr Alexander Schmemann’s perspectives on the importance of worship, i.e., of the Eucharist as an antidote to radical individualism and secularism. These are, in fact, re-read today because of the significant challenges confronting the pastorate and mission of the Orthodox Church in the US.
The third chapter is entitled “Pastoral Theology, Liturgy, and Ministry.” Here, Heinrich Bedford-Strohm, Presiding Bishop of the Lutheran Church in Bavaria and former Presiding Bishop of the Protestant Churches in Germany, shows in his article “Where is God in the Pandemic? Theological Reflections from Thinking about and Practising Church-Leadership” that the pandemic has confronted the churches with various difficult questions both practical and theological. Is there a responsible way of celebrating worship in the churches without risking people’s health? Numerous creative new digital formats were developed in the parishes to offer alternatives. How does God work in the pandemic? Is there any causal connection between God and the virus? The responses to this question are not only of philosophical importance, but have fundamental consequences on how we pray and how we identify God’s presence in our lives. The responses range from affirming God’s role in the origin of the virus, for example, by identifying the deus absconditus in it, via emphasizing the mystery in God’s action up to seeing God’s action in God’s spirit of continuing creative energy to overcome suffering in human and non-human nature. The latter approach is developed by an understanding of God based on God’s revelation in Jesus Christ and an eschatological interpretation of its visibility beyond current experiences of destruction and despair.
His Eminence Joseph Doré, Archbishop Emeritus of Strasbourg, France, Professor at the Institut Catholique de Paris (1971–1994), former member of the International Theological Commission (Rome), and President of the International Academy of Religious Sciences (Brussels) from 1993 to 1999, reflects in his contribution on the connection between theology and pastoral ministry. This reflection is solidly grounded on his personal experience as theologian and pastor of the Church, which led him to distinguish and unite at the same time these two realities. The author starts from pastoral ministry and the need to fill it with theological meaning and purpose, then switches perspectives and shows its importance for theology. A short concluding section allows him to put in place several milestones for a coherent and valuable articulation between theology and ministry.
His Eminence Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos and St Vlassios (Greece), one of today’s most-read Orthodox theologians, presents the pastoral ministry according to the teachings of Saint Nektarios, Bishop of Pentapolis. For this purpose, on the one hand, he reveals several aspects of the pastoral theology that St Nektarios taught as a teacher at the Rizarios church school, and, on the other hand, his pastoral ministry exercised for the monastic community of the Holy Trinity Monastery in Aegina.
Fr Pavel Velikanov (Moscow, Russia) reflects on neurotic disorder within the milieu of Eastern Orthodox pastoral tradition. In his study, the author focuses on the problem of neurotic religiosity and tries to define it, show its symptoms, factors, and conditions that lead to its emergence, and the challenges for its theological comprehension. Proposing several pastoral approaches to persons who suffer from neurotic religiosity, he encourages the ministers of ecclesial communities to carefully discern between spiritual problems and problems which need professional psychological assistance.
His Eminence Job Getcha, Archbishop of Telmessos, Permanent Representative of the Ecumenical Patriarchate to the WCC in Geneva and co-chair of the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, Dean of the Institute of Orthodox Theology in Chambésy-Geneva, Switzerland, and professor at the Institut Catholique de Paris, considers the close connection between Liturgy, mystagogy, and mission in the life of the Church. Starting with the importance of the Liturgy in the life and mission of the Church, he puts forward the idea that, in the context of our deeply secularized society, the Liturgy needs more than ever to be explained in order to continue to serve as a means of truly re-evangelizing modern societies.
Fr Michel Asmus, Professor at St Tikhon’s Orthodox University, Moscow, Russia, analyzes the hymnography of St George, Bishop of Nicomedia (9th century). Placing the author and its work in the more general context of the genre of hagiographical canon, Asmus tries to demonstrate the role and importance of George of Nicomedia in the hymnographic creation of his time by revealing the main characteristics of the hagiographical canons developed by him.
Fr Sorin Şelaru (Bucharest, Romania) takes up an expression often used by HB Patriarch Daniel of Romania in his writings which deepens the ecclesial vocation of theology as “the science of salvation and everlasting life.” For this purpose, the author underlines the theological mission of episcopal ministry as presented in the Church canons, confessions, and the Liturgy of the Church. He emphasizes the relationship between dogma and experience, the apophatic dimension, and the spiritual character of the theology lived as a humble exercise in expressing the inexpressible and directly linked to the experience of prayer, ascetic and sacramental life in the Church.
The fourth chapter focuses on “Ecclesiology, Christology, and Theology of Dialogue.” Athanasios Vletsis, Professor of Orthodox Systematic Theology at Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Germany, underlines that at the moment, when the Catholic Church wants to try the “synodal way” on the world level, the Orthodox Church seems perplexed by the crisis of its synodal structures, after the Pan-Orthodox Council of Crete (2016), and the major split in Ukraine (2018). The article looks in three directions for the reasons of this dysfunctionality: a. the lessons from the Pan-Orthodox Council have not yet been drawn, but would be very revealing; b. the procedure of recognition of a new Autocephalous Church, which has currently paralyzed Pan-Orthodoxy, points to the unfinished homework when mechanisms and canons from an ancient past prove inadequate to solve complex new problems of autocephaly proclamation; c. finally, what is still lacking is not merely the mechanism of pan-Orthodox decision-making, but a theory of synodality that can be accepted in its primary substance by all Orthodox. One can then bet on whether a solution will be possible on the level of the Orthodox Churches alone; instead, a mode will be found to practice synodality on the ecumenical level, which seems to the author of the article the only promising one for the future.
The study of Professor Hervé Legrand op (Paris, France) falls within the ongoing preparations for the Synod of Roman Catholic bishops in 2023. It deals with the development of synodality in the Roman Catholic Church, with a significant emphasis on the rapprochement it allows with the Orthodox Church.
Theresia Hainthaler, Emeritus Honorary Professor for Christology of the Early Church and Theology of the Christian East at the Graduate School of Theology and Philosophy Sankt Georgen, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, writes about the meaning of the historical-theological studies and the practical ecumenical engagement that cross-fertilize each other. This is true for scholars like Alois Grillmeier or André de Halleux. Based on their research and others, the emergence of separate ecclesiastical hierarchies after Chalcedon and a new outline of the development of Christological thinking after Chalcedon are presented. Christological research thus provided a new understanding. On this basis Christological declarations were possible in the last 50 years which could bridge centuries-old divisions. Three of them are analyzed in her study on “Jesus der Christus im Glauben der (einen?) Kirche. Christologische Forschungen und ökumenischer Dialog mit Kirchen des Ostens”.
Gunther Wenz, Emeritus Professor of Systematic Theology at the Evangelical Theological Faculty of the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich, Germany, Head of the Wolfhart Pannenberg Research Center at the Munich University of Philosophy, Full member of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences, writes about “Enipostaziere. Christological considerations on the hypostatic union following Dumitru Stăniloae” (“Enipostaziere. Christologische Überlegungen zur hypostatischen Union im Anschluss an Dumitru Stăniloae“). Dumitru Stăniloae, “the theological teacher of the jubilarian,” describes the Incarnation with the term “enipostaziere,” i.e., as Union of the divine and human natures in the hypostasis of the divine Logos as in the one person of Jesus Christ. Wenz analyses the dogmatic definition of the Person of Jesus Christ, the relationship between hypostasis and nature, and reflects on the incarnated Logos as true Adam.
Peter C. Bouteneff, Professor of Systematic Theology at St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, USA, begins his essay “‘Our Faith Depends on Realities, not Terms.’ Reflections on Eastern-Oriental Theological Dialogue Past and Present” by taking note of two modalities of patristic encounter with alternate positions. One is straightforwardly polemical, where the meanings of the heresy are either obvious, or its subtleties are not of interest. The other is eirenic in seeking to find understanding. In this latter mode, the fathers are clear that what matters in doctrine is the realities, not the terms, for the terms can sometimes be misleading. They stress that we sometimes cut off more than necessary and lose people for the wrong reasons. The essay observes that the contemporary dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the Oriental Churches is based on the second (eirenic) mode, seeking to find the meanings behind the terminological differences. With that in mind, we discover that – contrary to some documents rebuking the dialogue statements – many allegedly problematic formulas are, in fact, faithful to Orthodox fathers and the Fifth Ecumenical Council.
Alberto Melloni, Secretary of the Foundation for Religious Studies (Bologna, Italy), Chair Holder of the UNESCO Chair on Religious Pluralism and Peace at the University of Bologna, Professor in History of Christianity at the University of Modena-Reggio Emilia, emphasizes the importance of the critical judgment and historiographical expertise on the Second Vatican Council, which decisively marked the life of the Catholic Church. The starting point of the study is the evocation of Giuseppe Alberigo’s famous five-volume history of the Second Vatican Council which aimed to restore its historical development and the questions posed by its preparation and holding. The originality of the council is then considered from a double perspective: synchronic and diachronic. Besides highlighting the council’s peculiarities, the author critically analyzes the post-conciliar tendencies to de-historicize Vatican II and concludes with the issue of the restoration of the Council.
Martin Illert, Adjunct Professor for Eastern Christian Studies at the Faculty of Theology of Halle-Wittenberg University, and Head of the desk for Eastern Europe in the Church Office of the Evangelical Church in Germany writes about “Getreuer Dolmetscher des Orthodoxen Christentums” – Stefan Cankovs Berliner Vorlesungen 1927”. In his introductory lectures to Eastern Christianity in Berlin in 1927, the Bulgarian-Orthodox theologian Stefan Cankov exercised his mediation on two sides. He tried to show his Orthodox brethren that the inter-church commitment was not a betrayal of Orthodoxy. And he encouraged Western Christians to take a deeper look at the tradition of the Eastern Churches. Cankov gave powerful impulses for the theological and ecumenical thinking of his time and beyond with both mediations.
Georgios Martzelos, Professor of Dogmatics and History of Dogmas of the Theological Faculty of the Aristotle University in Thessaloniki, Greece, and Director of the Postgraduate Program of Theological Studies of the University of Neapolis in Paphos, underlines in his article “Pneumatologie, Spiritualität und Ekklesiologie in der orthodoxen Tradition. Ein Kommentar zum Dokument ‘Die Kirche. Auf dem Weg zu einer gemeinsamen Vision’ (Studie der Kommission für Glauben und Kirchenverfassung Nr. 214)” the relationship between Pneumatology and Ecclesiology, as presented in the document of the “Faith and Order” Committee of the World Council of Churches entitled “The Church. Towards a common vision” (No. 214). Examining the relationship between Pneumatology, Ecclesiology, and Spirituality from an Orthodox point of view, he shows that all three are not conceived as autonomous and independent because they are inseparable from each other, expressing the inextricable and functional relationship between Theology and Spirituality within the Orthodox Tradition.
Emmanuel Clapsis, former Archbishop Iakovos Professor of Orthodox Theology at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology in Boston, USA, acknowledges in the introduction to his article about “Ecumenism and Ecumenical Methodology” the contribution of His Beatitude Patriarch Daniel as “bold, creative, and insightful.” His Beatitude is appreciated as “one of the leading Orthodox theologians (…) with immense pastoral sensitivities and appreciation of the Orthodox Church’s Challenges in the modern world.” He “has blessed the Church with his extraordinary Patriarchal leadership” and “is a dynamic exponent of the biblical, patristic, and Orthodox liturgical tradition. Furthermore, he has contributed to the wealth of Orthodoxy”. In this article, Clapsis analyses the present landscape of the ecumenical movement, the challenges, and the stages in ecumenical dialogue. He underlines the necessity for an ecumenical language and the need to reconcile ecclesial memories.
In his contribution, Peter de Mey, Professor of Systematic Theology at the Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies, KU Leuven, Belgium, reflects on the level of interest in Orthodox-Roman Catholic dialogue during the last decades and presents some suggestions for its acceleration. He recalls for this purpose the efforts made by several Catholic theologians during the Second Vatican Council in order to prepare the groundwork for a fruitful dialogue with the Orthodox and offers an overview of the work of the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church and of the regional Orthodox-Catholic dialogue, subsequently, in the United States.
Once again, we would like to thank most warmly all authors for their significant and enriching scientific contributions to this festschrift.
May God grant His Beatitude Patriarch Daniel peace, health, and many blessed years to carry out his significant mission for the Glory of the Most Holy Trinity and in service to the Holy Church of Jesus Christ.
Ad Multos Annos!