Category: Tradition (Page 8 of 17)

Standing During Liturgy Could Lead To Better Worship

July 6, 2014 / Robert Arakaki / 15 Comments

“We did know whether we were in heaven or on earth.” Source

Traditionally Christians stood to worship God. This has been the historic practice of the Christian Church. This began to change during the 1200s when backless stone benches appeared in English churches. Then in the 1300s and 1400s they were replaced with wooden benches.

Churches were not commonly furnished with permanent pews prior to the Protestant Reformation. With the rise of the sermon as the high point of the Sunday morning worship pews became a standard part of Protestant architecture. What many Protestants and Evangelicals are not aware of is the fact that there was a time when pews were rented out to families, and that some church pews became inheritable family property! That is how the Free Methodist church got their name. In addition to being opposed to slavery, they were also in favor of free pews!

Another interesting fact to consider is that churches that claim to hew to the regulative principle of worship, e.g., Reformed churches, have pews in their sanctuaries despite the fact that there is no biblical warrant for pews in places of worship!

Pews are more than trivial adiaphora, they shape our worship significantly. Pews bolted to the floor in neat rows create a lecture hall atmosphere where the lecture is the principle activity. The practice of having pulpits, often two pulpits, underscored the importance of the teaching aspects of worship. Protestant worship is very concerned with facilitating information transfer and cognitive teaching. One has to wonder if any of these churches ever attempted to go back to the more historic style of worship where people stood in the Liturgy.

Protestant worship is quite different from historic Christian worship where the Liturgy of the Word (the Scripture reading followed by the homily) was preparatory to the Eucharist. In the Orthodox Church the priest reads the Gospel, not from the pulpit on the side, but at the entrance to the Altar area. This symbolizes the New Law (Gospel) going forth from Mount Zion in the last days to all nations (Isaiah 2:2-5) Following that, in the Eucharist the Christian goes up to commune with Christ, to receive His Body and His Blood “for the remission of sins and everlasting life.”

Converts to Orthodoxy often find themselves adjusting to a “new” style of worship, standing throughout the entire Liturgy. This “new” style is actually the worship style of the ancient Church. Some Orthodox jurisdictions allow for pews, while others prefer the more traditional practice of no pews with exceptions made for the infirm and elderly. When I first started attending the Orthodox Church on a regular basis I found that standing in the Liturgy made a lot of sense. Standing for extended periods of time facilitated a state of attentiveness and inner stillness. I also learned how to deal with the discomfort of standing for extended periods.

As a former Protestant I know that Protestants do not sit throughout the entire worship service. Instead, there is a constant shifting from sitting to standing back to sitting. This is not bad, but I found that it gave the worship service a certain kinetic quality. I noticed this kinetic quality in both ‘traditional’ Protestant services and contemporary praise services. Orthodox worship, on the other hand, inculcates an inner stillness that allows one to reflect on the words being sung or chanted. This inner stillness also allows for the Holy Spirit to speak to my heart.

So when I read how recent article “Standing During Meetings Could Lead To Better Work” about how secular research found that standing during meetings can boost attentiveness and group productivity, I was reminded of the similar benefits of standing during the Divine Liturgy. This makes sense in light of the fact that the word “Liturgy” comes from the Greek “leitourgeia” which means “work of the people.”

“Standing During Meetings Could Lead To Better Work ” Source

Will there be pews in heaven? Consider the passage from Revelation 7:9:

After this I looked and there before me was

a great multitude that no one could count,

from every nation, tribe, people and language,

standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. (NIV)

Jurassic Park and the Protestant Quest for the Early Church

June 19, 2014 / Robert Arakaki / 13 Comments

In the movie Jurassic Park is an unforgettable scene where a group of humans see living breathing dinosaurs towering over them, munching on leaves on the tree tops. The dinosaurs were the product of careful biological engineering. Scientists extracted DNA from dinosaur fossils, reconstructed the original DNA strand, inserted the reconstructed DNA into egg embryos, and then hatched the eggs.

Michael Crichton’s Jurassic Park is an apt metaphor of the recent quest among Protestant for the ancient Church. Examples of this yearning include: Robert Webber’s ancient-future faith network, Peter Leithart’s Reformational catholicism, and the convergence church movement. These recent movements have earlier precedents in the 1800s, e.g., Mercersburg Theology and the Oxford Movement. The Protestant quest for the ancient Church is similar to the paleontologists’ fascination with the lost past of dinosaurs. Having broken away from the corruptions of Roman Catholicism, Protestants asserted they were now in a position to return to the purity and simplicity of ancient Christianity.

The desire to reconnect with the past is a natural one. It is like an adopted child wanting to learn about his or her birth parents. This interest in antiquity is also biblical. The prophet Jeremiah wrote about seeking after the good way, the ancient paths (Jeremiah 6:16). The book of Proverbs talked about respecting the “ancient boundary stone” put in place by the forefathers (Proverbs 22:28).

Reconstructing the Past

Extracting dinosaur DNA

The novel Jurassic Park can be seen as a metaphor of the flaws within Protestant ecclesiology. If one pays close attention to the story line of Jurassic Park one becomes aware that the dinosaurs are not real dinosaurs in the sense of being identical to those that existed in the Mesozoic era. The dinosaurs of Jurassic Park were laboratory creations, the product of careful scientific research. In the same way there is a certain artificiality in the Protestant quest for the early Church. Where the scientists in the laboratories of Jurassic Park worked from DNA extracted from dinosaur fossils, Nevin and Schaff worked in seminary libraries seeking to excavate ancient church texts. More recently, Webber and Leithart used the same methods attempting to renew the church by selectively drawing on the church fathers and early liturgies.

Within Jurassic Park are nuggets of fascinating philosophical questions. One fundamental problem was that the dinosaurs of Jurassic Park were artificial creatures. They are artificial because of modifications made to their bodies. This gave rise to all sorts of problems and made them inherently unstable.

“You don’t know for sure?” Malcolm said, affecting astonishment.

Wu smiled, “I stopped counting,” he said, “after the first dozen. And you have to realize that sometimes we think we have an animal correctly made—from the standpoint of the DNA, which is our basic work—and the animal grows for six months and then something untoward happens. And we realize there is some error. A releaser gene isn’t operating. A hormone not being released. Or some other problem in the developmental sequence. So we have to go back to the drawing board with that animal so to speak.” (Jurassic Park p. 111)

One example of genetic modifications built into the recent ancient-future and reformational-catholic churches is the absence of the episcopacy. This is no mistake. To adopt an episcopal structure would mean surrendering congregational autonomy so precious to so much of Evangelicalism. In this sense they are still genetically Protestant. Their clinging to Protestant church structures fundamentally separates them from the early Church founded by the Apostles. The bishop was integral and fundamental to the early Church. Ignatius of Antioch, a student of John the Apostle and the third bishop of Antioch, stressed the importance of obeying the bishop (see Letter to the Smyrneans VIII, IX).

Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. Without the bishop’s supervision, no baptisms or love feasts are permitted.

Yet the libertarian strand in Protestant theology will not allow for bishops in the historic sense. Many Protestants by reading only the Bible and ignoring the early church fathers end up projecting their Protestant bias onto church history. But such an omission would be like a historian writing a book about ancient Rome with no mention of the Caesars! Or a law professor teaching a course on American jurisprudence with hardly a mention of the Supreme Court.

Another quandary in the Protestant quest for the early Church is whether one could actually bring it back or just end up with a caricature. A similar quandary existed for the scientists in Jurassic Park who had never seen a living dinosaur from the Mesozoic era.

Grant said, “How do you know if it’s developing correctly? No one has ever seen these animals before.”

Wu smiled. “I have often thought about that. I suppose it is a bit of a paradox. Eventually, I hope, paleontologists such as yourself will compare our animals with the fossil record to verify the developmental sequence.” (Jurassic Park p. 114).

The paradox here is whether these reconstructed dinosaurs were really dinosaurs or something else. All that the scientists had to go by were fossils, not actual living dinosaurs from the Mesozoic era. Similarly, for Protestants all they had to go by were ancient patristic texts but no living church tradition that goes back to the early Church. This leaves them guessing as to what the early Church must have been like.

Similarly, there is a tension between people who have little patience for the deep questions and just want to get things done.

Hammond sighed. “Now, Henry, are we going to have another one of those abstract discussions? You know I like to keep it simple. The dinosaurs we have now are real and—“

“Well, not exactly,” Wu said. He paced the living room, pointed to the monitors. “I don’t think we should kid ourselves. We haven’t re-created the past here. The past is gone. It can never be re-created. What we’ve done is reconstruct the past—or at least a version of the past.” (Jurassic Park pp. 121-122)

Lacking a living tradition that goes back to the Apostolic Church, Protestants end up having to reconstruct the early Church as they best understood it to have been. The Jesus Movement of the 1970s had house churches where people sat on the floor, played guitars and sang praise songs, and everyone with a Bible in their hands. More recently, Evangelicals have discovered the writings of the early church fathers and are seeking to incorporate these discoveries into their congregations: reciting the Nicene Creed, celebrating the Eucharist weekly, vestments for the clergy, candles and incense. Not being part of a living tradition they end up creating a “version of the past” trusting God to bless their sincere efforts to return to the early Church. It is like lost travelers seeking to find their way home without knowing where home is on the map.

The Lost World

The Lost World Scenario

An alternative scenario can be found in another book written by Michael Crichton, The Lost World.

“No, no,” Levine said earnestly. “I’m quite serious. What if the dinosaurs did not become extinct? What if they still exist? Somewhere in an isolated spot on the planet.” (Lost World p. 5)

The Protestant view of history assumes that there once was an apostolic Church but it no longer exists today. But Protestants and Evangelicals need to ask the question: What if the apostolic Church still exists today? What if there was a church where the errors of the papacy were avoided? What if that church was within driving distance today?

For Evangelicals Eastern Orthodoxy is a Lost World. Many Protestants and Evangelicals drive by these funny looking ethnic churches with strange names unaware of these churches’ connection to the early Church. The estrangement of the Great Schism of 1054 resulted in Western Christians, both Roman Catholics and Protestants, not being aware of Orthodoxy’s existence and its distinctive approach to doctrine and worship. The Protestant Reformers’ bitter struggle against medieval Catholicism gave Protestants a severe astigmatism that skewed their understanding of church history. Protestants came to view the early Church through the prism of Catholicism imagining the Apostolic Church to be part a lost past. But while the Protestants of the 1500s can be excused for having a distorted perspective on church history, the situation is quite different today. Many Protestants in recent years are learning about the early church fathers and are having a firsthand encounter with Orthodoxy.

This is why the first visit to an Orthodox Church is often such a surprise for many Evangelicals. Orthodoxy represents what many Protestants are seeking after, the early Church before Roman Catholicism. The Orthodox Liturgy is part of living tradition that goes back to the days of the Apostles. At first glance many would find this hard to accept especially the icons, the elaborate liturgical ceremonies, and ornate vestments worn by priests. All these are so radically different from the austere minimalism that mark Reformed, and especially, Puritan worship, or the exuberant expressiveness of charismatic worship.

Images in Dura Europos Synagogue 3rd century

But when approached from the standpoint of the Old Testament pattern of worship transformed by the New Covenant of Jesus Christ, the Divine Liturgy makes perfectly good sense. The vestments worn by Orthodox priests are patterned after those worn by the Old Testament priests. If Jesus Christ is the Passover Lamb who takes away the sins of the world then it makes sense to view the Eucharist as the culmination of the Old Testament sacrificial system. A careful reading shows that icons have a biblical basis in the Old Testament (Exodus 26, 2 Chronicles 3). Recent archaeological findings have shown that early Jewish synagogues had images on their walls. All this explains why a conscientious re-reading of Scripture and an open minded study of church history have led thousands of Protestants: pastors, professors, devout laymen to the conclusion that the Orthodox Church is indeed what it claims to be: the very Church founded by Christ himself, not some later knock off imitation. Visit Journey to Orthodoxy.com

Testing the Lost World Hypothesis

Protestant ecclesiology assumes a major discontinuity in history. Protestant church history is based on the idea that there once was a pure and apostolic Church but that early Church fell into spiritual darkness. It was not until the Reformation that Martin Luther recovered the Gospel and spiritual light returned to Europe. Protestants believe that using the principle of the “Bible alone” they will be able to reform (reconstruct) the Church as it was meant to be. These assumptions are foundational to defining Protestant identity. The Protestant view of history is crucial for explaining why Protestants are different from Roman Catholics (they follow the ‘Bible alone’) and why they remain separate from Roman Catholics (they have Gospel in the pure form of justification by ‘faith alone’).

Orthodoxy presents a significant challenge to the Protestant paradigm of church history. It is the Lost World that did not become extinct. Orthodoxy claims a historical continuity that goes back to the first century but it looks so different from what Evangelicals imagine the early Church to have been like. Evangelicals can test Orthodoxy’s claim to historical continuity by studying the church of Antioch.

Many Evangelicals greatly admire the Apostle Paul the great missionary but only a few know the name of his home church. Every missionary has a home church from which they were sent. According to Acts 13:1-3, Paul received his missionary calling at the church of Antioch. In this brief passage we learn during the Liturgy the Holy Spirit directed that Paul and Barnabas be set aside for missionary work. The Church of Antioch – the Apostle Paul’s home church — continues to exist to this day. The current Patriarch of Antioch, John X, can trace his apostolic succession back to the first century. The Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America, which received two thousand Evangelicals into Orthodoxy in 1987, has direct ties with the Apostle Paul’s home church. This is a spiritual lineage that any Evangelical would be proud to have!

Another way an Evangelical can test the Lost World hypothesis is by tracing the form of worship used in the church of Antioch. We learn from that same passage (Acts 13:1-3) that the worship in Antioch was liturgical worship. The Greek word for “worshiping the Lord” (NIV) or “ministered to the Lord” (KJV) is “leitourgounton” from which we get “liturgy.” This is why Orthodox Christians refer to their Sunday worship as “the Liturgy.” The worship of the first Christians in Jerusalem was liturgical. This can be seen in Acts 2:42 which referred to the Liturgy of the Word (the Apostles’ teaching) and the Liturgy of the Eucharist (the breaking of bread). On most Sundays we use the fifth century Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and about ten times a year we use the fourth century Liturgy of St. Basil the Great. These liturgies which were inherited or passed on from the bishops before them are part of the Tradition of the ancient Church. In October we use the first century Liturgy of St. James. The liturgy was named after the Lord’s brother who served as bishop of Jerusalem and in that capacity presided over the first church council recorded in Acts 15. This historical continuity in Orthodox worship stands in stark contrast with the rapidly evolving forms of worship in Protestantism and Evangelicalism. The historic pattern of worship is pretty much lost in much of Evangelicalism. In the more progressive churches the order of worship changes from week to week depending on the decisions made by the praise and worship team. In the more ‘traditional’ Protestant churches the order of worship found in the back of the hymnal is never used by the congregation.

A third way an Evangelical can test the Lost World hypothesis is by tracing the form of church government. The early form of church government was episcopal – rule by bishop. Ignatius of Antioch, the third bishop of Antioch and a disciple of the Apostle John, wrote a series of letters on his way to martyrdom in Rome in 98 or 117 about the importance of obeying the bishop. In his letters he exhorted people not to celebrate the Eucharist (Lord’s Supper) apart from the bishop (Letter to the Smyrneans VIII and IX). All this is so different from Evangelicalism which favors congregational autonomy or the Presbyterian classis. Protestants may be averse to the episcopacy due to their opposition to the Roman Catholic Church but the fact remains that the episcopacy was the norm in the early Church. The notion of a universal papal supremacy was a distortion that Protestants rightly objected to. Orthodoxy also object on the basis that papal supremacy is contrary to Tradition. This supports the Lost World hypothesis that the Orthodox Church is the same church as the early Church.

Jurassic Park

GMO Churches?

Robert Webber’s ancient-future worship movement and Peter Leithart’s reformational-catholicism are examples of a GMO churches. “GMO” refers to “genetically modified organism.” Like the Jurassic Park scientists working to re-create dinosaurs, contemporary theologians and pastors are seeking to re-create the ancient Church based on their research. Their motives may be sincere but the means they used are highly problematic. Sola Scriptura, because it denies Holy Tradition a regulative function in the interpretation of Scripture, has given rise to all sorts of novel doctrines and worship practices resulting in ever multiplying church divisions. As a result there is no integrating center for Protestantism despite their longing for the unity of the ancient Church.

A carefully guarded and transmitted Holy Tradition gives Orthodoxy doctrinal stability and historical continuity that Protestantism never had. The transmission of Holy Tradition is done through apostolic succession, one bishop passing on the Faith to his successor. Another significant factor has been Orthodoxy’s practice of closed communion — only those who are Orthodox and in good standing can partake of the Eucharist. The Eucharist in addition to being the source of unity for Orthodoxy also protects the Orthodox against heterodox innovations. To use an analogy from biology, closed communion prevents unchecked interchange of unwarranted ideas and practices.

All this confronts sincere and serious Evangelicals with a profound question: Is the early Church of the Apostles really gone for good or is it still alive here and now in the Orthodox Church? This in turn presents them with a crucial choice: Do I place myself within the life and communion of the Church that has roots going back to the Apostles – or do I persist in the quest to reconstruct the early Church? In recent years thousands of Protestants and Evangelicals have completed their quest for the ancient Church by taking the bold step of joining the Orthodox Church. Interested readers can learn more about these journeys to Orthodoxy by checking out the titles and links recommended below. The ancient Church founded by the Apostles has never gone away, it is here in the Orthodox Church. By the mercies of God, we bid you: “Come and see.”

Robert Arakaki

Recommendations

Becoming Orthodox by Peter Gillquist

Thirsting for God in a Land of Shallow Wells by Matthew Gallatin

Facing East by Frederica Mathewes-Green

Orthodox Worship: A Living Continuity With the Temple, the Synagogue and the Early Church by Benjamin Williams

The Orthodox Church by Kallistos (Timothy) Ware

The Orthodox Way by Kallistos (Timothy) Ware

Blog: Journey to Orthodoxy

Blog: Letters on Orthodoxy

Blog: Liturgica

Aging Protestants, Deep Sighs, and Holy Tradition

April 14, 2014 / Robert Arakaki / 26 Comments

Pastor Andrew Sandlin recently posted a beautiful and poignant blog posting “Time Passages” about the trials of an aging church leader. He wrote:

It is arresting to observe the constancy of older men and women within the variability of historical flux and the inevitable change it engenders. The world has changed, but they have not. They seem an anachronism to their juniors, for whom the unquestioned assumptions of the present age are normative. The elders carry with them the perspectives, virtues, convictions, prejudices, and vices of the peculiar era of their youth. To their idealistic juniors, the prejudices and vices predominate, and the virtues and convictions evaporate at the scrutiny of youthful eyes naively conditioned by a single era, their own era, whose normativeness they would not think to question. (Emphasis added)

The reflection is by a church elder concerned about the handing over of church leadership to the next generation. He fears that the hard earned wisdom of his generation will be dismissed out of hand by their successors.

The passage of time is hitting baby boomer Evangelicals hard. As they head into the 50s and 60s their perspective on life changes. The sunny optimism of youth is being overtaken by troubling shadows of old age. The forever young baby boomers find themselves being confronted by end of life issues like retirement, physical decline, and inevitable death.

The local church once thought to be a place of solace and security has become a source of uncertainty and anxiety. Michelle Van Loon in “Aged Out of Church” described how the mid life crisis is affecting Evangelical churches.

Church should be a place of meaningful connection with God and others at every stage of our lives, but nearly half of more than 450 people who participated in an informal and completely unscientific survey I hosted on my blog last year told me that their local church had in some painful ways exacerbated the challenges they faced at midlife. As a result, they’d downshifted their involvement in the local church from what it had been a decade ago.

Pastor Sandlin is calling for an intergenerational conversation in the church. He wants the younger generation to be receptive to the “strangeness” of the past.

What in the 1960’s was termed the “generation gap” is, however, precisely the opposite of what should occur. A conversation, not a gap, is what is most needed. A generational conversation is essential not only to transmit the best elements of the past’s “strangeness” to a succeeding generation but also to exhibit the subversive fact of historical conditioning to the previous one, which ordinarily glories in the peculiar features of the age of its youth, and intensely so the older it grows. (Emphasis added)

Pastor Sandlin has a good point here. There is indeed a need for intergenerational conversation. The wisdom of the Fathers is desperately needed, especially by cultures like ours which have been given over to the youth. However, there are powerful forces in Evangelicalism that work against this. Even the best and most mature Evangelical churches place a premium upon youthfulness and the innovation that goes with it. Michelle Van Loon observed:

When we in the church ape (awkwardly!) our culture’s obsession with all things young and cool, when we focus our energies on creating ministries targeted at the same desirable demographic groups targeted by savvy advertisers, we communicate to those who don’t fit those specs that they are less desirable to us than the ones we really want in our church family.

The emphasis on evangelism has led to the drive to boost church membership, draw in young families, and keep up with modern youth culture. As a result of this, many ministry programs in Evangelicalism have been geared to the first half of life issues: how to find God’s will for finding a good job and the perfect mate, how to have a solid spiritual life while living life to the fullest, how to raise a godly family, how to have a Christian witness at work and with friends. Little is said from the pulpit about second half of life issues.

From Generation to Generation

Pastor Sandlin’s lament is in many ways that of a Protestant without an enduring tradition. There is no capital “T” Tradition in Protestantism, only small personal traditions. He wrote:

The solidarity of humanity is marked partly by this gripping trait – the ability not merely to span eras (“tradition”) but to commit a small portion of one’s past, one’s private, unrepeatable tradition, to another individual. (Emphasis added.)

These small traditions are fine in the short run but are incapable of sustaining a congregation for the long haul, i.e., over the centuries. That is why Protestantism is in such dire straits today.

The abandonment of Tradition has made the Evangelical culture vulnerable to the flux of modernity. For Evangelicalism the Gospel is eternal but the forms of church structure and the framework for worship and discipleship are temporary and contingent, changing from one generation to the next – often every few months if not every week! Like their Roman Catholic elder brothers Evangelicals never quite escaped theological innovation. This disregard/dismissal of Tradition has resulted in one generation feeling little obligation much less a sacred duty to learn from their predecessors about the Christian way of life.

This historical flux lamented here by Pastor Sandlin can be traced to the Protestant principle: “Ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda” (the church reformed, but ever reforming). The Protestant Reformers did not want change for change sake; rather they sought change on the basis of Scripture. But without a Tradition that acts as a guardian to how Scripture is to be read and interpreted, the Reformers opened the floodgates for innovation.

Over the past several centuries Protestantism has undergone tremendous changes, but in recent years the pace of change accelerated. Protestantism’s landscape has changed such that familiar landmarks are disappearing or becoming barely recognizable to the older generation. Evangelical theology has recently branched off into neo-Calvinism, neo-Pentecostalism, and postmodern Emergent theology. This loss of historical memory can be seen in the recent shift away from “traditional” hymns to contemporary worship with praise bands using electric guitars and drums. The irony here is that the so called “traditional” hymns for the most part date back to the 1600-1800s!

Orthodox Tradition — Holy Friday Lamentations

The Comfort and Security of Holy Tradition

So, what is missing? What is missing from the best of Evangelicalism is a deeply rooted and sacred commitment to Holy Tradition. Tradition consists of one generation passing on and another generation receiving a body of teaching. The Apostle Paul expected the early Christians to be committed to Tradition. He admonished the Christians in Thessalonica:

So then, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle. (2 Thessalonians 2:15; OSB; emphasis added)

Here Paul instructs the Christians to hold fast to both written Tradition (Scripture) and to oral Tradition. This concern with the traditioning process did not begin with Paul. Tradition did not as it were fall unexpectedly from the sky into the lap of the early Church. No, Holy Tradition has a deep historicity that reaches back into the Tradition of the Old Testament saints and patriarchs.

What we have heard and known,

What our fathers have told us.

We will not hide them from their children;

We will tell the next generation . . . .

. . . which he commanded our forefathers

to teach their children,

so the next generation would know them,

even the children yet to be born,

and they in turn would tell their children.

(Psalm 78:3-6; NIV; emphasis added)

This sense of obligation to the past is deeply engrained in Orthodoxy. Metropolitan Kallistos Ware in The Orthodox Church (ch. 10) captured wonderfully this deep sense of reverence the Orthodox have for the past.

When Orthodox are asked at contemporary inter-Church gatherings to sum up what they see as the distinctive characteristic of their Church, they often point precisely to its changelessness, its determination to remain loyal to the past, its sense of living continuity with the Church of ancient times. (Ware pp. 195-196; emphasis added)

So, what is Holy Tradition? Ware describes it in this way:

A tradition is commonly understood to signify an opinion, belief or custom handed down from ancestors to posterity. Christian Tradition, in this case, is the faith and practice which Jesus Christ imparted to the Apostles, and which since the Apostles’ time has been handed down from generation to generation in the Church. But to an Orthodox Christian, Tradition means something more concrete and specific than this. It means the books of the Bible; it means the Creed; it means the decrees of the Ecumenical Councils and the writing of the Fathers; it means the Canons, the Service Books, the Holy Icons – in fact, the whole system of doctrine, Church government, worship, spirituality and art which Orthodoxy has articulated over the ages. Orthodox Christians of today see themselves as heirs and guardians to a rich inheritance received from the past, and they believe that it is their duty to transmit this inheritance unimpaired to the future. (p. 196, emphasis added)

In contrast to Sandlin’s aging church elder who has only personal insights to pass on to the next generation in Orthodoxy there is a sense that one is part of a Great Tradition that spans the generations and extends to the Second Coming.

John of Damascus

This reverence for Tradition goes back to early church fathers like John of Damascus who wrote:

We do not change the everlasting boundaries which our fathers have set but we keep the Tradition, just as we received it. (in Ware p. 196; emphasis added)

John of Damascus here is echoing the Prophet Jeremiah:

Stand at the crossroads and look;

ask for the ancient paths,

ask where the good way is,

and walk in it,

And you will find rest for your souls.

(Jeremiah 6:16, NIV; emphasis added)

If the traditioning process is part of both the Old and the New Testaments, one has to wonder — and lament with them — why there is so little of it among Evangelicals.

Orthodox Christians Processing with Icons - Holy Cross Orthodox Church - Williamsport, PA

Ancient Tradition – Processing with Icons, Holy Cross Orthodox Church – Williamsport, PA

Unto the Ages of Ages

The stability of Holy Tradition makes intergenerational conversation a natural and expected process. The solidarity of Orthodoxy lies in Holy Tradition. The Liturgy will be there for generations to come. The liturgical calendar and the ascetic disciplines will likewise be followed by future generations. A longtime Orthodox can share insights to younger Orthodox about keeping the fast, following a rule of prayer, how to participate in the Liturgy, and the significance of the Pascha (Easter) service. They can talk about the lives of the saints and martyrs, or the writings of the church fathers.

As the years go by one becomes familiar with the prayers and the theme for the services; one’s heart and mind are reshaped through repeated exposure to the prayers and hymns of the Church. Spiritual healing takes place and enlightenment of the soul commences. In Orthodoxy the past is not “strange” but familiar because it is rooted in the Great Tradition. These things are even more true when there are Orthodox parents and godparents who faithfully live out the teachings of the Church. Where Pastor Sandlin’s church elder can only hope to pass on a private unrepeatable tradition, the Orthodox Christian passes on a Tradition held by the entire Church.

In the Liturgy are prayers that can be helpful for dealing with the second half of life issues. These two petitions are found in the Completion Litany just before the Nicene Creed.

That we may live out our lives in peace and repentance, let us ask of the Lord.

A Christian end to our lives, peaceful, free of shame and suffering, and for a good defense before the judgment seat of Christ, let us ask.

Here we ask God for his mercies in order that we may be faithful to the Gospel all our life. We seek to live a life of prayer and repentance in preparation for that great day when we will stand before the judgment seat of Christ (Matthew 7:21-23, Romans 2:6-11). The Good News is not just the forgiveness of our sins, but also our being transformed into the likeness of Christ. This is the doctrine of theosis (deification). As we stand during the Liturgy we see the icons of the saints who have gone before us. We are reminded that one day our earthly life will come to a close and we will then become part of the great cloud of witnesses mentioned in Hebrews 12:1. Eventually, the intergenerational conversation will take us to the communion of saints and to the life of the age to come where we will come face to face with Christ.

Radiant Pascha!

The Ancient Beauty

Too late have I loved you, O Beauty so ancient and so new, too late have I loved you!

(Confessions 10.27)

Here Augustine talks about his encounter with God; this line will also resonate for many converts who have been seeking something more in worship. There is a mystical beauty about Orthodox worship that makes even Protestant “traditional worship” ring a bit hollow and the notion of “contemporary worship” ludicrous. The Liturgy is for the ages. The discovery of the Liturgy leads many converts to wish they had known of the Liturgy sooner.

It is old, very old. So old that almost I feel young again . . . .

The line above is from the Lord of the Ring where Legolas the Elf commented on Fangorn Forest. In the Orthodox Liturgy there is the sense of being part of an ancient tradition that goes on and on and never grows old. Becoming Orthodox involves more than acquiring a new theology, one joins a church rooted in antiquity. Ware wrote:

The thing that first strikes a stranger on encountering Orthodoxy is usually its air of antiquity, its apparent changelessness. Orthodox still baptise by threefold immersion, as in the primitive Church; they still bring babies and small children to receive Holy Communion; in the Liturgy the deacon still cries out: ‘The Doors! The Doors!’ – recalling the early days when the church’s entrance was jealously guarded and none but members of the Christian family could attend the family worship; the Creed is still recited without any additions. (p. 195; emphasis added)

Kursk Root Icon in Hawaii

I have experienced the Orthodox Church’s antiquity in surprising ways. One is the recent visit of the Kursk Root Icon to Hawaii. This particular icon dates back to the 1200s. I was amazed to see something that is five centuries older than the United States of America and which predates the Protestant Reformation by three centuries! One cannot help but feel like a child in the presence of this ancient heritage. It is indeed a heritage, a Holy Tradition worthy of reverence and our sacred duty to pass on to our “children’s children” with confidence as we depart this world for the ages to come. May God have mercy on us all.

Robert Arakaki

Sources

P. Andrew Sandlin. “Time Passages” in docsandlin.com (3 April 2014)

Michelle Van Loon. “Aged out of Church” Christianity Today (5 April 2014)

Timothy (Kallistos) Ware. The Orthodox Church. Penguin Books. 1963.

Augustine. Confessions. (Translation by John K. Ryan) Penguin Books.

Category: Tradition (Page 8 of 17)

Standing During Liturgy Could Lead To Better Worship

Jurassic Park and the Protestant Quest for the Early Church

Aging Protestants, Deep Sighs, and Holy Tradition

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives