Before You Become Eastern Orthodox...

preview_player
Показать описание
Gavin Ortlund exegetes a letter from Theophan the Recluse, outlining the historic Eastern Orthodox position on the salvation of other Christian traditions.

Gavin Ortlund (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) is President of Truth Unites and Theologian-in-Residence at Immanuel Nashville.

SUPPORT:

FOLLOW:

MY ACADEMIC WORK:

PODCAST:

DISCORD SERVER ON PROTESTANTISM

CHECK OUT SOME BOOKS:

00:00 - Introduction
03:13 - Exegeting Theophan's Letter
26:57 - Considering the Implications
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

Thanks everyone for watching and to those who commented. Just to address a few concerns:

1) Lots of comments are saying, "this is an emotional appeal, " even though I anticipated that response and explicitly addressed it at 7:07. The concern is not emotionalism, but obedience to Jesus. Granted, we disagree on what it means to obey Jesus in discerning the church, but that should be the point of discussion, not emotion. See my discussion there and throughout.

2) Some are saying, "why are you only quoting one bishop to represent all of Orthodoxy, rather than encouraging people to talk to their priest?" Again, I addressed this at 3:41. Theophan is a saint and a contemporary father of the church so his views can't be dismissed as his own private view. They have more authority than an individual priest. Further, the whole goal of this video was to do a deep dive on one figure; I have given more of a serial survey in my prior video mentioned here at 2:15, where I walk through an array of saints and councils.

3) Others are appealing to another quote attributed to Theophan the Recluse. I am uncertain about the authenticity of this quote; we often find it cited on the internet but it seems to come to us indirectly (most commonly cited from Seraphim Rose) and I cannot locate the original source. The quote is also ambiguous: it cautions against worrying about the salvation of the non-Orthodox, perhaps hinting at its possibility (though still reflecting the same exclusivity about the “truth” and “heresy”). Hence my effort here at a careful exegesis of this longer letter Theophan, where his view of the non-Orthodox is given a fuller array of categories (heretics, false prophets, preaching another Christ, etc.), which I hope provides a fuller and more rounded portrait of his view. At any rate, however you interpret this particular quote, the basic concern of institutional exclusivity is not changed. For a fuller portrait of the entire late medieval and early modern Orthodox view, see my video "Does Eastern Orthodoxy Have the "Fullness of the Faith?"

4) Others are saying, “if you think the EO can be saved, why do you even care if Protestants become EO?” The answer to that is the truth matters. Just because salvation may be possible in a given context does not mean that its errors do not have serious consequences.

I will keep trying to read comments as I have time; thank you all for engaging the video.

TruthUnites
Автор

“You ask, will the heterodox be saved… Why do you worry about them? They have a Saviour Who desires the salvation of every human being. He will take care of them. You and I should not be burdened with such a concern. Study yourself and your own sins… I will tell you one thing, however: should you, being Orthodox and possessing the Truth in its fullness, betray Orthodoxy, and enter a different faith, you will lose your soul forever.”

~ St. Theophan the Recluse

RouterOSRS
Автор

Hello Gavin! This message is from an Orthodox priest who really likes your YouTube channel. I have found your studies, and your knowledge of the Church Fathers, to be really surprising and helpful! I even refer to them at my own parish (depending on the issue, as you'd expect!). Thank you for portraying such a peaceful posture even with those you disagree with.

But I wouldn't make a comment if that's all I had to say on a video like this! In my opinion, you have a tendency, on this issue of the salvation of the non-Orthodox, to take quotes out of context and make absolute but incorrect conclusions. I'll give a few examples.

The first example is from this video. From this letter of Saint Theophan, you make an absolute conclusion about the salvation of non-Orthodox. However, this letter was written in a very particular context which you said yourself in the video: that an Evangelical preacher was seemingly preaching among Russian Orthodox people, the implication being this took place in Orthodox Russia. As a pastor myself, I would immediately suspect that such a preacher would be doing this in order to win converts from the Orthodox Faith to his flock. In other words, this letter does not come as the result of two friends from two denominations, both faithful Christians in their own spheres, sitting down with each other and sharing their thoughts about each other's salvation; it is a defense of the flock, protecting the sheep from wandering astray from a potential poacher. I would expect nothing less from you if an Orthodox preacher were among your Baptist parishioners trying to convert people; I might even expect to hear you say, "Icons are an accretion, and may border on idolatry." You might find it extreme to call Orthodox idolaters, but it is not unreasonable for you to suggest it if you are encouraging your Baptist parishioner to remain Baptist. In addition, St. Theophan's advice is given to the Orthodox Christian who may be considering leaving the Church about the consequences he would face for leaving. On the issue of the status of the non-Orthodox themselves outside of the particulars mentioned in St. Theophan's letter, other commenters here have produced another quote from St. Theophan, who is open to the possibility for their salvation. I don't think we need to set St. Theophan against himself as if he were of two minds on the issue.

The next example concerns your view of the Seventh Ecumenical Council and its anathemas of those who do not venerate icons. From what I can recall you saying in other videos, you believe these anathemas condemn a substantial number of well-meaning Christians, yourself included, who are outside the Orthodox Church. However, I believe you are taking the Seventh Council out of context. Anathemas are used internally, not externally. In other words, the Council anathematizes those within the Church who say such things, not those outside. As St. Paul says himself,  "For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside?" (1 Cor 5:12).

The last example I want to use is from your discussion of the "ark of salvation theory." As I've seen in your videos, you believe that the Orthodox Church has changed its stance on the salvation of non-Orthodox to being exclusive, reaching the height of this thinking in the medieval era and only abating in the past century. You take this as evidence that Orthodoxy's claim to never change its doctrinal stances is demonstrably false. However, this is also out of the very specific contexts in which Church Fathers wrote on these issues. Let me explain.

In the period of the Early Church (up to even the Great Schism of 1054), the phrase "Catholic Church" had very obvious meaning -- it was the Church you found throughout the world, whether in India or Britain. The Early Church had no origin other than the apostles. All other churches (usually called schisms and heresies) were typically localized, and all had founders of their groups. These schisms/heresies were typically defined by open rejection of the Church, and attempting to proselytize members of the Church into joining their faction. At such a time, no wonder the Church spoke so clearly about salvation being within the Church, in a time of conflict with these non-Orthodox groups, and to keep the faithful from wandering away.

Then, consider the Medieval period. Following the Great Schism, within only 150 years, the Roman Catholics were in open war against the Orthodox -- not with the pen, but the sword. They sacked Constantinople, installed a Latin Kingdom, and launched Crusades against the Kievan Rus in order to 'resubmit' them to the Bishop of Rome. The Roman Catholics were actually successful in conquering and converting many Orthodox into what is today called the Eastern Rite. I see it as no wonder, then, that the Orthodox would speak so vehemently against them, especially as concerns salvation. You have a very good video on the problems with pre-Reformation Roman Catholicism that I think helps prove this point.

However, today, there are numerous differences with these two previous periods: 1) The vast majority of Christians are not in armed conflicts with one another, but live in relative peace. 2) Unlike in the period of Early Christianity, it is not factually clear who that "Catholic Church" is anymore. Even if you read piles of books, like-minded and well-meaning Christians come to very different conclusions. It is not the "slam-dunk" like it would have been in the 3rd century. 3) The schisms and heresies of the past were often defined, in especially their early years, by rejecting the Orthodox Church from which they divided. However, today's atmosphere is completely different. Most Christians of the world have been historically separated from the Orthodox Church for a thousand years, some even more. Most of them don't even know about Orthodoxy; and if they do, they probably have no idea, or motivation, to research it. This is why I agree with Metropolitan Philaret (Voznesensky), who said: "It is self evident, however, that sincere Christians who are Roman Catholics, or Lutherans, or members, of other non-Orthodox confessions, cannot be termed renegades or heretics—i.e. those who knowingly pervert the truth… They have been born and raised and are living according to the creed which they have inherited, just as do the majority of you who are Orthodox; in their lives there has not been a moment of personal and conscious renunciation of Orthodoxy. The Lord, ‘Who will have all men to be saved’ (1 Tim. 2:4) and ‘Who enlightens every man born into the world’ (Jn. 1.43), undoubtedly is leading them also towards salvation in His own way."

When you consider, then, how much of the context surrounding this conversation has changed, I find it no wonder that modern Orthodox saints and authors are more open to the salvation of non-Orthodox. Much like St. Paul's own epistles, we must understand them not just based on their bare content, but to whom they are written and for what purpose. I believe it is incorrect to make absolute statements, therefore, using our Tradition as if it can be divorced from historical context.

But I do want to add, and really mean: You do excellent work. I am sorry for all the toxic Orthodox responses you get online. I hope the 'tone' of my text appeared as peaceful as you are always in your videos. God bless you and thank you!

sgtshdfg
Автор

Hi Dr. Ortlund, Your argument boils down to the following

(1) EO requires one to believe no individual outside of the visible boundaries of the canonical EO church can be saved;

(2) People outside of the visible boundaries of the canonical EO church can be saved;

Therefore, we should reject

(3) one should join the EO church.

This fails for several reasons.

First, (1) is demonstrably false. EO are not required to hold that each individual outside of the visible boundaries of the church is damned. You point to statements condemning certain heterodox *groups* —which does not translate (as you assume) into a judgment as to every *individual* member of these groups at any point in time and for any reason. This is a fallacious inference.

Plus, even if your interpretation of these statements were correct (and I think they generally are not), your argument still fails because it ignores the distinction between theologoumenon and dogma. An EO is not required to affirm a theologoumenon, even if it is the overwhelming majority view; and the status of individuals outside of the church is not a subject of a binding dogma, even if you could argue that it is the subject of a prevailing theologoumenon.

Thus, (1) fails because you are mistaking statements condemning groups as necessarily entailing condemnation of every individual who is ever a member of that group at any point in time for any reason; and also because you are mistaking evidence of a prevailing theologoumenon as evidence of dogma.

Second, even (1) were true (and it is not), your argument still fails because we have more epistemic warrant for (3) than for (2). So, we should sooner reject (2) than reject (3). One man's modus ponens is another man's modus tollens.

Third, even if (1) and (2) were correct, this would still not be a reason for rejecting (3). You would need to show that other churches are available to join that do not require one to believe even more false beliefs. One could still reasonably accept (3), while accepting 1&2 on the ground that joining other churches would require one to believe more and worse errors than (1).

Finally, I think it is interesting that the way you argue about EO is very similar to the evidentialist framework that Plantinga faults atheists for assuming. The question for someone considering EO is a paradigm level one. The irony is that the common ground from which you purport to critique EO is actually not ground to which your paradigm gives you justified access.

newmannahas
Автор

Eastern Orthodox theology acknowledges that God's mercy and grace extend beyond human understanding, and therefore it does not explicitly deny the possibility of salvation for those outside the Church, especially for those who have never had access to it.

For individuals who have never encountered the Eastern Orthodox Church or had the opportunity to understand its teachings, the Orthodox perspective often rests on the concept of God’s *oikonomia* (economy) and boundless compassion. God's judgment and mercy are ultimately beyond human comprehension, and Orthodoxy affirms that God desires all people to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4).
Thus, while the Church sees itself as the fullest means of receiving God’s grace, it leaves room for the possibility that God may save individuals outside the visible boundaries of the Orthodox Church, especially those who have sought truth and lived with sincerity according to the light they have received.

rodrobinson
Автор

Raising my children in the Eastern Orthodox Church has been such a blessing. I converted 12 years ago and feel awash in beauty and the Lord’s Grace.

When y’all are tired of “striving about words to no profit” go visit your local Parish and see the good work being done for your salvation. Be a part of something that endures!

JustSomeGuy
Автор

orthodox inquirer here, soon becomming a catechumen. Plenty of answers when you look for them to these objections. Orthodoxy is truth! Godbless

jakewilliam
Автор

Converted to orthodoxy after 30 years as an evangelical four years ago. Never looked back.

sheldonthorpe
Автор

Forgive me Gavin. Are you trying to be ironic? Bishop Theophan wrote a private letter cautioning his parishioner to be careful before jettisoning his parish life in favor of an exotic new tradition that Bishop Theophan had serious reservations about. It seems to me that the only difference between this and what you are doing is that he NEVER intended this letter to be published, whereas you are publishing your message to the faceless masses. What do you make of your pastoral responsibility to be sensitive to the listener's individual circumstances? Bishop Theophan isn't making wholesale counsel as you are here. If you'd like to promote "Truth in the service of Unity" (isn't that what "Truth Unites" means?), why not pick this quote from a different Russian bishop around the time of Theophan?:
Met. Philaret of Moscow: I do not presume to call false any church which believes that Jesus is the Christ. The Christian Church can only be either purely true, confessing the true and saving Divine teaching without the false admixtures and pernicious opinions of men, or not purely true, mixing with the true and saving teaching of faith in Christ the false and pernicious opinions of men. ...You expect now that I should give judgment concerning the other half of contemporary Christianity, but I do no more than simply look out upon them; in part I see how the Head and Lord of the Church heals the many deep wounds caused by the old serpent in all the parts and limbs of this body, applying now gentle, now strong, remedies, even fire and iron, in order to soften hardness, to draw out poison, to cleanse the wounds, to separate out malignant growth, to restore spirit and life in the half-dead and numbed structures. In such wise I attest my faith that in the end the power of God will evidently triumph over human weakness good over evil, unity over division, life over death.

Or others from other periods (even though you are arguing that a more pastorally ecumenical tone is unique to the 21st century)?:
St. Mark of Ephesus: We need investigation and conversation in matters of theological disputation so that compelling and conspicuous arguments may be considered. Profound benefit is gained from such conversation, if the objective is not altercation but truth, and if the motive is not solely to triumph over others. Inspired by grace and bound by love, our goal is to discover the truth, and we should never lose sight of this, even when the pursuit is prolonged. Let us listen amicably so that our loving exchange might contribute to consensus.

St. Gregory of Nazianzen: For we are not seeking victory, but to gain brethren, by whose separation from us we are torn. This we concede to you in whom we do find something of vital truth, who are sound as to the son. We admire your life, but we do not altogether approve of your doctrine. …I will even utter the Apostle’s wish. So much do I cling to you, and so much do I revere your array, and the color of your continence, and those sacred assemblies, and the august virginity, and purification, and the psalmody that lasts all night and your love of the poor, and of the brethren, and of strangers, that I could consent to anathema from Christ, and even to suffer something as one condemned, if only you might stand beside us, and we might glorify the Trinity together.

Met. Evlogy: On the heights of their spiritual lives have not the Saints passed beyond the walls that separate us, walls which, according to the grand saying of Metropolitan Platon of Kiev, do not mount us as far as heaven?

Fr. Sergius Bulgakov: Unity is something already given and something we must attain to.

Fr. Georges Florovsky: The highest and most promising ‘ecumenical virtue’ is patience.

nicenefarm
Автор

Most of these comments arent even adressing actual theology and the beliefs of the church. Its just saying how the converts can be rude lol

King_Immanuel
Автор

Jesus vs the Church is a false dichotomy. The Church is Christ’s Body. He speaks through the Church and saves through the Church. The Church is the visible prolongation of the Incarnation. Salvation is from Christ through His Church, including the Church’s Mysteries. This isn’t that hard to understand.

norala-gxld
Автор

“The mercies of God are not bound by the visible boundaries of the Church. God alone knows the heart, and He judges not as man judges. God’s ways are beyond our understanding, and His grace can act upon all who seek Him sincerely.”

“We do not have the right to judge the fate of those outside the Church. Rather, we trust in the boundless mercy of God, who desires that all men come to the knowledge of the truth and be saved. He will judge each according to his heart.”

“The Church is the vessel of salvation, and yet, we cannot say that grace is absent from those who sincerely seek God, even if they do not yet know the fullness of the truth. God prepares each soul in His own way.”

- SAINT THEOPHAN THE RECLUSE

we take someone’s theology, not three pages of it. Also, yeah, what he said is accurate, anglicans we’re going into well established Russian EO neighborhoods and calling people to the name of Christ, that’s fine, but also a slightly off interpretation. Of course people are going to reject that.

MichaelH__J
Автор

This is such an untapped area. So glad to see you covering it.

My parents got married in the Greek Orthodox church (I'm Greek on my Dad's side), and I grew up with a lot of random info about the religion and the church. (Plus, our yearly visits to the Greek Fest they held cuz... Baklava.) But I never saw it seriously examined until recently since many people seem to be converting to it.

MelissaDougherty
Автор

It’s puzzling why being outside the Church strikes such a dissonant chord, given that historically, the Church has consistently regarded those beyond its bounds in just this way. Only if one were to invent an “invisibility cloak” to obscure the Church’s boundaries could the notion of being “outside” seem so foreign or out of place.

anestichristos
Автор

I grew up with Russian Otrhodox tradition and customs and I can tell hands down that some Americans are very naive, because they are looking for a historic church, BUT the modern Eastern Orthodox Church IS NOT AS historic as Early church. I do appreciate rich tradition and all that is good there, however you have to guys consider following things: lots of superstitions, sectic thinking, political nationalistic imperialism perspectives, mix with worldly ideas (as long as you are baptized, probably infant with no consent of yours and come to church occasionally and confess your sins - that’s nice, but your life remains almost as of atheist or agnostic), wierd traditions (along with good you get the bad ones), not to mention this hierarchy of legalism and religious system.

Now some few years later after my conversion experience and transformation I came to re-consider some views and I stopped demonizing Eastern Orthodox church and saw the good part. Since nobody got it all right and we all need each other.

But the Gospel was preached to me and more clearly revealed through evangelical Protestant friends and then I met Jesus and really started reading Bible, praying and saw my life changed.

I do believe there are genuine Orthodox Christians and I encourage and cheer on everybody as long as they pursue Christ and His word and what He accomplished, not the religious system.

And I tell you for me mostly it was superstitions and some wierd ideas and not being taught of the word of God. For some people it might have been very harsh legalism and bondage - I came dry out of the water and God showed mercy on me in many ways.

I totally understand you if you are burnout on Pentecostal, charismatic or evangelical religious form, legalism or some cult, but it doesn’t mean you have to get yourself into another religious system. Dr. Outland has a good point, guys!!! We should be followers of Jesus and grow in the knowledge of God and we all are His church, One body, orthodox, eastern, Armenian, catholic, reformed, Protestant, non-denominational.

ilmarmeldre
Автор

What a wonderful video. This video put into words my biggest problem with Eastern orthodoxy, and this exclusionist mentality is the reason I left. My only problem with this video is that it didn't come out sooner! God bless you dr. Ortlund, May this reach the heart of many so they don't have to go through the pain that I and many others have over ecclesial anxiety.

tanagrant
Автор

Im Protestant but seems like we are telling EO what they believe and they say no we don’t believe that, and we just say no you have to believe that because of this guy said this. We should let them speak for themselves. This letter was in context of an EO leaving the church of course his letter is going to be firm and direct. This same guy also has been quoted elsewhere that it is possible for others to be saved. It’s a mystery.
Theophan the Recluse. “You ask, will the heterodox be saved... Why do you worry about them? They have a Saviour Who desires the salvation of every human being. He will take care of them. You and I should not be burdened with such a concern. Study yourself and your own sins”. I don’t think EO converts have to say now all westerners are all 100% lost, it’s just not the case. This doesn’t seem fair to them.

ryanmckenziegilbert
Автор

Gavin, thank you so much for the work you do. Bless you 🙏🏻

fm
Автор

It is frankly quite surprising to see how many defenses of Orthodoxy in the comments do not address the point of this video, nor even attempt to.

renrichardson
Автор

God bless you Dr. Ortlund, you videos always useful to me to strenghten my love for Scripture, God's words. I hope you will always filled with Holy Spirit ❤️❤️❤️

ansich