We now come to what will be my last post on Eugenia Constantinou’s book, Thinking Orthodox. I’m not going to cover Part 3 of her book, “The Application of Orthodox Theology.” Here in this post, I’m going to cover the final three chapters in Part 2 of her book.
Chapter 9: Orthodox Theology and the Shaping of Phronema: The Fathers
In addition to discussing how both the apostolic Tradition and Scripture contribute to shaping the Orthodox mindset, Constantinou now talks about how the Church Fathers help as well. Now, to be honest, I doubt too many Christians, Orthodox or otherwise, have ever really read that much of the Church Fathers. I’ve read some, but I’m by no means an expert. Nevertheless, I think it is a good thing to get a better grasp on the importance of the Fathers (even if you never curl up at night with a copy of John Chrysostom’s homilies!).
Constantinou states that the Fathers are seen as the defenders of Orthodoxy against heretical distortions. Still, they aren’t some kind of rigid authority, but rather provide basic guideless for the Christian life and the doing of theology. She also states that there are basically four characteristics of a Church Father: (1) Orthodoxy of doctrine, (2) Brilliance of mind, (3) Holiness of life, and (4) Ecclesiastical approval.
In terms of theology, Constantinou emphasizes that the Fathers show that Orthodox theology is deep, yet uncomplicated. To “follow the Fathers,” therefore does not mean to treat them as infallible and feel like you have to agree with everything they said. The fact is, sometimes they made mistakes—they most certainly are not infallible, and they didn’t always agree with each other. But what they reflect is the proper Orthodox mindset and approach to both Scripture and theology. They preserved the apostolic faith and then sought (as we should) to express that faith and Tradition in fresh ways to speak to the Church today.
Constantinou ends the chapter by briefly talking about the dangers of citing the Fathers without truly understanding them—essentially proof-texting the Fathers to fit your own agenda. The example she gives is how young earth creationists (yes, there are those within Orthodoxy as well) yank statements from the Fathers out of context to try to argue that Christians have always read the creation story in Genesis literally. As Constantinou says, “They proudly claim to prove their Orthodoxy by insisting on their misguided patristic interpretation of Genesis. Unfortunately, they have read enough of the Fathers to misunderstand them but not enough to understand them” (203).
Chapter 10: The Characteristics of the Orthodox Theologian
As the title suggests, in this chapter, Constantinou lists a number of characteristics truly Orthodox theologians. Even though not everyone is going to be an actual theologian, and even though not every Christian is going to be Orthodox, I think it is a good list of characteristics that every Christian can strive for. I am just going to give the list and comment on only a few of them:
- The true theologian is pastoral: They strive to serve the Church, and this means they must have discernment on not just what to say, but how to say it, given the situation.
- The true theologian practices humility and recognizes his limitations: They admit their shortcomings and don’t pretend to be an expert in every field. This should say something to pastors who feel they need to address everything under the sun, as if they were experts in politics, science, or a whole number of things.
- The true theologian is authentic and honest: I particularly like these two quotes: (1) “Without honesty we do not speak in an authentic manner. But honesty also requires discernment and humility. We will be called to account for the way we present the teachings of the Church and the way we interact with others.” (2) “Above all, theology requires love and discernment, since the goal of everything in the Church is to cure spiritual illness, not to inflict wounds” (213).
- The true theologian is spiritually vigilant: They struggle against spiritual complacency, for that is the only way any progress in spiritual enlightenment can occur.
- The true theologian acts from love and has pure motives: Self-explanatory.
- The true theologian is not disputatious: Constantinou particularly mentions the dangers of debating on the internet! Ouch! She also quotes St. Symeon who warned “against dabblers and meddlers without experience of faith.” Sort of a “don’t throw your pearls before swine” idea.
- The true theologian has discernment: Self-explanatory.
- The true theologian observes balance: Not to sound to “Jedi knight” here, but it really is true. Finding spiritual balance in today’s world is a challenge.
- The true theologian exercises freedom with faithfulness: This one is very important for all Christians. I’ll just share a number of quotes from Constantinou:
“The Church does not demand that we accept even what is considered essential to our salvation, because the Church does not make demands. We ought to believe, and we are encouraged to believe. But just as God never demands that we have a relationship with Him but leaves it to our free will, the Orthodox Church never demands that we believe anything” (220).
“The early Church did not know—and the Orthodox does not know today—any automatic, formal or authoritarian way of discerning truth from falsehood. Discerning truth from falsehood is possible only if one possesses the Orthodox phronema” (221).
“In Orthodoxy, the Church is not an authority just as God is not an authority, since authority is something external to us. The Church is not authority…but Truth. Since Christ lives within us, He cannot be an external authority that is imposed on us” (222).
10. The true theologian accepts creativity, but not speculation and innovation: I particularly love this one. Growing up within Evangelicalism, I’ve always felt that Evangelicalism was low on creativity and high on needless speculation and innovation. That’s why I found so much of it boring, quite frankly. It was like there was always a search for a new, innovative “ad campaign” to try to sell something that really wasn’t all that appealing. In particular, when I was a kid in the late 70s-early 80s, there really was a lot of good and creative Christian music that was able to reflect the historical Christian faith without being speculative or trite. I loved it. By the late 80s, though, when it became more of a “Christian music industry,” and the canned stuff that was produced simply was not creative at all—and it all became rather hollow. And so, in order to attract more people, true creativity was abandoned for innovation and, quite frankly, shallow marketing.
11. The true theologian reflects the mind of Christ, not personal opinion: This is also an important point. There is nothing wrong with giving one’s personal opinion on theological matters, but one should always be clear when one is just expressing an opinion.
12. The true theologian accepts mystery and paradox: Another good quote to consider: “The Western phronema often suppresses, dismisses, minimizes, or ignores this stance. The Western mind is compelled to define and explain everything, since without a rational explanation a concept or a fact cannot be considered true, or, conversely, all truth can be proven rationally” (227). There are, indeed, plenty of Christian truths and truth claims that can be argued for and rationally explained—but not everything, because God simply cannot be contained by our limited intellect. We need to be okay with that.
13. The true theologian has an unwavering commitment to Tradition: Another thought-provoking quote: “True Orthodox theologians will not allow themselves to be pressured to violate Tradition. They won’t follow the crowd. They won’t just go along and capitulate to Western Christian norms and ideas. The West claims to value diversity, but it does not value diversity in religious perspectives among Christians if the beliefs do not align with what ‘logic’ demands” (228).
14. The true theologian accepts Tradition over human rationality: Again, this does not mean a rejection of reason. It simply means an acknowledgment that human reason can only take you so far.
Chapter 11: Theological Education
Most of this chapter is a warning against the dangers of being what Constantinou calls an “armchair theologian”—basically acting like a know-it-all when you have no real theological training at all. The fact is that Orthodox theology, like any kind of learning, does require training. And since it deals with the divine revelation in Christ, it also requires humility and a striving for spiritual growth (see all those characteristics in chapter 10!). Consequently, Constantinou says that is why you tend to see a lot of “armchair theologians” arguing all the time on the internet, just spouting off facts and random, decontextualized quotes (either Bible verses or quotes from various Christian theologians from the past).
Constantinou’s response to that sort of thing is simple: Don’t kid yourself—not everyone is an expert! Let’s face it, it can be kind of fun to argue sometimes. I’ve gotten involved in a number of internet debates over the years—some have been fun, some have been frustrating, and some have been absolutely infuriating, to the point where I would stew in my bed that night, fuming about how I had just been driven over the edge and realizing that I wasn’t as spiritually mature as I thought I was. A truly mature Christian wouldn’t have said some of the things I said!
Nevertheless, I do think there is some value to that sometimes. It does reveal your character to yourself and shows you where you need to improve. In any case, it is what it is….
This is the End
Okay then! That’s about it! Hopefully these past few posts have inspired one or two people to go out and get Thinking Orthodox. It really is a good book. I know these posts have not gotten a lot of traffic, but that’s okay. Just the process of writing these posts have helped me crystalize a number of things about Orthodoxy, the Christian faith as a whole, and my own spiritual journey. Hopefully you’ve found these posts helpful in some small way.
I appreciate these posts. I’m an Evangelical Christian but also at times one of its biggest critics. I have long thought that there is much Protestants, esp. Evangelicals, can learn from the Orthodox and Roman Catholic traditions.
One of my biggest complaints if the anti-intellectualism of large swaths of Evangelical Protestantism (see Mark Noll’s classic *The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind*), whereas Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism have always seemed to me to have a much more robust intellectual tradition that encourages believers to cultivate their minds. Much of Evangelicalism is based solely on emotions and catering to believers’ “felt-needs” and is basically selling a product.
Pax.
Lee.