FOR AN ETHOS OF DIALOGUE IN THE ORTHODOX CHURCH: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES OF ECUMENISM AND INTERFAITH RELATIONS

 

 Ecumenical Trends Vol 49 No 5,  Graymoor Ecumenical & Interreligious Institute  September/October 2020, pp.6-8.

 The Rev. Dr. Nicolas Kazarian is Director of the Department of Inter-Orthodox, Ecumenical, and Interfaith Relations at the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. He was a member of the Commission that worked on For the Life of the World. He is a specialist on the Orthodox world and ecumenical dialogue, and has published several articles on religion and politics. He is a Professor at the Saint-Sergius Orthodox Institute, and teaches at the Catholic University of Paris

I would like to begin by identifying an abuse of language. We hear too often, especially in English but also in other languages, the term “ecumenical” used uncritically to refer to what is better classified as interfaith dialogue. This confusion is problematic in many ways. First of all, the pur-pose of the two dialogues is different. Ecumenical dialogue is intended to work towards bringing Christians closer together, or even, as its ultimate goal, towards their unity in a communion of churches. As far as interfaith dialogue is concerned, it is by no means a question of religious unity in the sense of Christian unity. Rather, it should be considered as a pursuit of peace, a vector of knowledge, and a means of countering misrepresentations of the other transmitted by prejudice, bigotry, hatred, and discrimination. However, even if I insist on the fact that these two types of dialogue are different by nature, there is nonetheless an integrity between the two based in the very essence of dialogue: to create relationship, connection, and ultimately a sense of communion among partners.In this light, the Orthodox Church in general and the Ecumenical Patriarchate in particular have developed a deeper understanding of what dialogue is, not only as a subsistence strategy, but also as a theological space for communion and deification. The recent document en-dorsed by the Ecumenical Patriarchate and prepared by a group of Orthodox scholars from various backgrounds, entitled For the Life of the World: Towards a Social Ethos of the Orthodox Church (available at www.goarch.org/social-ethos), explores (among many other social issues) the centrality of dialogue as part of an Orthodox social ethos. This essay offers a brief overview of the challenges and opportunities of ecumenical and interfaith dialogues, par-ticularly in and for the Orthodox Church, so as to contex-tualize the recent social ethos document which registers dialogue as core dimension of Orthodox thought and life. 

Dialogue as Ethos 

Taken in its most rudimentary definition, dialogue (in the sense of διάλογος) is a simple exchange of words. Immediately, though, the term takes on a theological dimension. For how can there be an exchange of words without participation in the very mystery of the Word, the Word of God, echoing the first verses of the Gospel according to Saint John the Theologian: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was turned to God, and the Word was God. In the beginning it was turned to God. All things were through him, and nothing that was, was without him. In him was life and the life was the light of men, and the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness understood it not. (John 1:1)For the Life of the World explains as follows:Dialogue, in the Orthodox understanding, is essentially and primordially a reflection of the dialogue between God and humanity: it is initiated by God and conducted through the divine Logos (dia-logos), our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Pervading all human life, dialogue takes place in all our encounters, personal, social, or political, and must always be extended to those who adhere to religions different from ours. And in all our connections and relationships, the Word of God is mystically present, ever guiding our exchange of words and ideas towards a spiritual union of hearts in him. (§54)Therefore, dialogue is a divine mission from which human-ity cannot be separated, for dialogue unites. It must thus be understood as something different from negotiation, debate, confrontation, invective, teaching, and so forth. To paraphrase a famous quote from Claude Lévi-Strauss (in “Collaboration between Cultures”) when speaking of civilization, dialogue “implies the coexistence of cultures offering the maximum diversity among them, and even con-sists of this coexistence.” Dialogue appears as a paradoxical tension between coherent coexistence and exposure to the maximum of diversity. This lesson applies to us in the ecumenical as well as in the interfaith field, where dialogue is not only theoretical, but also a praxis of coexistence. By this I mean that dialogue cannot only be conceived as a means, since it is also an end in itself, being a transformative participation in the Word of God. Dialogue understood only as a means of conversion loses its effectiveness. But when it becomes transformative and restorative of what we are meant to be, it takes on its full intensity. And this is not to say that such a transformative dialogue is without concrete effects. Dialogue makes it pos-sible to combat prejudice. Plato famously wrote his texts in dialogue forms, because the transmission of wisdom needs otherness. Dialogue decompartmentalizes and connects; it builds bridges between churches and across religions. 

 Dialogue, an Ecumenism of Peace 

What I have said previously about interreligious dia-logue being oriented toward peace between peoples does not, of course, mean that inter-Christian dialogue is uncon-cerned with peace. A characteristic example of dialogue as a mode of peacebuilding is the meeting of Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew in Jerusalem in 2014, on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the meeting of their predecessors Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras. As a direct result of this meeting, a prayer for peace was held on 8 June 2014 in the Vatican Gardens, bringing together Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli President Shimon Peres. This unprecedented gesture, with which Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew was associated, raised great hopes among all those involved in the dialogue – even as these hopes remain yet to be ful-filled, with a new war erupting but a month later. The so call “return of religions” was anticipated by the rise of a diplomatic ecumenism which developed in the con-text of the Cold War, and which aimed to open communi-cation with Christians caught on the other side of the Iron Curtain. The World Council of Churches, for example, had enabled real progress to be made by building bridges on both sides of Europe. Pope John Paul II’s commitment to world peace, especially during the first meeting in Assisi in 1986, is also remembered. It was the first inter-religious meeting of this scale. That same year, the United Nations had proclaimed 1986 as the “International Year of Peace” at a time when East-West opposition was still polarizing the planet and the war in Lebanon was raging. It is in this light that For the Life of the World treats dialogue as an inclusive principle, on the basis of which our churches are called to contribute in material and political ways to peace on a global scale:The Church knows, moreover, that the full mystery of God’s Logos transcends human comprehension, and communicates itself in ways too numerous and wonderful to calculate or conceive. The Church thus seeks dialogue with other reli-gious traditions not out of any desire to alter the deposit of her faith, much less out of any anxiety regarding that depos-it’s sufficiency, but out of a reverent love for all who seek God and his goodness, and in a firm certitude that God has left no people without a share in the knowledge of his glory and grace. (§55)

 The Interfaith-Ecumenical Nexus 

As the Encyclical of the Holy and Great Council of June 2016 reminds us, interfaith dialogue is today a central dimension of the search for peace. The conciliar text states, among other things: Honest interfaith dialogue contributes to the development of mutual trust and to the promotion of peace and reconcilia-tion. The Church strives to make “the peace from on high” more tangibly felt on earth. True peace is not achieved by force of arms, but only through love that “does not seek its own” (1 Cor 13.5). The oil of faith must be used to soothe and heal the wounds of others, not to rekindle new fires of hatred. (§17)The Orthodox Church strongly supports the importance of interfaith dialogue. Even before this dialogue was institu-tionalized and democratized in the early 2000s, it was rooted in the exposure of Orthodoxy to religious pluralism in its different geographical environments. Interreligiosity is powerfully linked to the church’s coexistence with religious actors and communities of diverse sensitivities and tradi-tions, for interreligiosity is known above all in the daily life of the faithful.The churches’ engagement in both ecumenical and in-terfaith dialogues generates particularly strong reactions within our communities. The rise of fundamentalism is a phenomenon that cuts across all religious traditions, with shared specificities such as the literal interpretation of sacred texts, moral rigorism, political instrumentalization, and finally a powerful opposition to any form of dialogue, be it ecumenical or interfaith. Indeed, the Orthodox Church is not immune to these isolationist temptations of the most radical fringes. Extremism and radicalization seek to pri-vatize the truth by promoting confrontation and an ethos of mutual exclusivity. Dialogue, then, is as essential within each church as much as between churches and religions, for it remains the way to build bridges of empathy, peace, and mutual support.

 Conclusion 

For the Life of the World refers, in its reflections on di-alogue, back to what must be the earliest explicit statement of interfaith theorizing in Christian literature:As for other religions, the Orthodox Church takes encour-agement from the words of the Apostle Paul to the Athenians at the Areopagus: ‘What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you’ (Acts 17:23). From this the Church is given license to proclaim that the true God in whom all humanity lives and moves and has its being is worshipped by peoples everywhere, Christian and non-Christian alike. And this makes her only more eager to make all persons and peoples aware that the face of this one true God shines forth unobscured in the face of Jesus Christ. (§58)As we have seen, however, this instructive, inclusivist approach is not the end of the story. There are points of undeniable convergence between ecumenism and interfaith dialogue which are not limited to pragmatic social issues or to the desire to convert, but also pertain to our deepest pos-sibilities of transformation in God. It seems to me necessary to engage in deeper, more serious reflection on the possible synergies between these spheres, respectful of their specific goals, in order to better understand the complexity of the world in which we live