“The bells at Belgrade’s Cathedral Church rang out today to announce that Bishop Irinej of Nis had been elected patriarch of the Serbian Orthodox Church.”
The 79-year-old Irinej will be the Serbian Orthodox Church’s 45th patriarch.
The veteran bishop, known to be relatively moderate, was picked at a gathering of dozens of bishops and other clergy at the Patriarchate in Belgrade.
He is expected to be enthroned on January 23 in a ceremony broadcast on television.
He will replace Patriarch Pavle, who died in November following a long illness at the age of 95. Pavle had headed the church for almost 20 years, a period that included the ethnic wars of the 1990s, which accompanied the breakup of Yugoslavia.
In a statement issued by the Belgrade patriarchate, Irinej said he would carry the “burden and all the problems of my awesome and difficult duty together with my fellow bishops.”
The new patriarch will have to face long-lasting issues such as relations with the Vatican and churches in Macedonia and Montenegro that are seeking independence.
Observers see Irinej as seeking compromise between conservatives — who are opposed to openness to other churches and Western influences in Serbian society — and reformists, who want the church to be more open and modern.
In a recent interview, Irinej said he would not oppose a visit to Serbia by the Roman Catholic pope. The hard-liners of the church have long opposed such a visit.” (from here)
In thinking further about “openness”, one’s stance on relations with other Churches stands out as defining if you’re a conservative, moderate, or liberal. I appreciate the traditionalist point of view of not allowing proselytizing western influences into one’s country, but in this day and age efforts to restrict such access can come across at totalitarian and condescending towards both the ones being kept out and the ones being protected from such influence. Such efforts also can come across as being based in fear. I wonder if there is a way to be fearlessly traditional and open at the same time.
This paragraph laments an unhealthy openness to the west:
Unfortunately, this Orthodox movement as a whole started to collapse when Russia began to be infiltrated by Western influence. In certain respects, Russia’s acquaintance with the European West was very beneficial. Many technical sciences and much other useful knowledge came from the West. We know that Christianity has never had any aversion to knowledge of that which originates outside itself. Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysostom studied in pagan universities, and many writers, among whom were our spiritual authors and many of the best theologians, were well acquainted with pagan writers. The Apostle Paul himself cited quotations from pagan poets even in the Holy Scriptures. Nevertheless, not all that was Western was good for Russia. It also wrought horrible moral damage at that time, for the Russians began to accept, along with useful knowledge, that which was alien to our Orthodox way of life, to our Orthodox faith. The educated portion of society soon sundered themselves from the life of the people and from the Orthodox Church, in which all was regulated by ecclesiastical norms. Later, alien influence touched Iconography as well. Images of the Western type began to appear, perhaps beautiful from an artistic point of view, but completely lacking in sanctity, beautiful in the sense of earthly beauty, but even scandalous at times, and devoid of spirituality. Such were not Icons. They were distortions of Icons, exhibiting a lack of comprehension of what an Icon actually is. (from here)
A distinction between what is true, holy, and authoritative does not have to be thrown out when considering openness. When thinking of strict, purist traditionalism, on one hand I think it is healthy to hold that it does not need any improvement or influence from elsewhere. A rough-hewn log cabin Church with no electricity, served by a consecrated priest in handmade vestments, with beeswax candles and hand-copied service books (without the filioque) sung in Znamenny chant lacks nothing. But this is not how people live anymore. I think they should. Now how to get them that way. Let them come, be nice to them, but be the most stubborn non-conformist in history. Curiosity and appreciation of other “developments” can be entertained in conversation, and then left at the door of the true Church.
One of my complaints during the years I was against Harry Potter was how discriminatingly and condescendingly Muggles (those who denied magic) were portrayed. They were seen as oaffish, dumb, and mean. The portrayal was angry and unloving. I think Rowling, after she vented in the first book or two, maybe even legitimately so in that stage of grieving (anger) over a missing dimension in people’s lives and their own hostility to it (not that I’m promoting magic, but deification, as if that’s going to make anyone more comfortable) calmed down and legitimized an appreciation for technology, which Muggles use instead of magic, in the character of the wizard, Mr. Weasley. Not that he wanted to trade in magic and live as a Muggle. He was secure with his own reality, but open to how others lived in a non-threatened, non-hostile way.
There is a time and place for entertaining outside realities. Sometimes the Church has baptized “foreign” elements, such as electricity, for better or worse. But if anything is opposed to her teachings, she draws a line and will defensibly not let it in. The Orthodox Church is the authority and any outside teaching must humble itself to her judgment. There are various ways this authority is exerted, and loving discernment must be applied as responses are tailored to fit the conversation. In abortion, heresy, and homosexuality for instance, the unwavering truth must be maintained while considering the stage of development and understanding in the “opponent”. An earlier post brought out how the “opponent” may have other qualities one can learn from such as their love, care, and service to others. Sometimes, however, we must sadly look on as others depart like the Rich Young Ruler who are not open to the fullness of life in Christ. To follow Christ one must be willing to give up everything. And for Orthodox, that may even include some of our ideals like the un-electrified log cabin.
