Every so often I read something that tends to put a damper on my ecumenical bonhomie with respect to the Orthodox Church. Here is such an item, written by one Fr. Leonidas.
No priestly act is of more far-reaching consequence than a conversion to Orthodoxy.
It crucially determines for all time the convert’s personal status, his marital rights and restrictions as well as his religious allegiance. If a pledge of unqualified loyalty to the Orthodox Church is subsequently betrayed, the result is disastrous, not least for the priest involved, should he have been guilty of an error of judgment in authorising the conversion on insufficient evidence of sincerity.
In that event, he is bound to feel some personal responsibility and liability for every violation of Canon Law the convert may commit. For only through his act in accepting a non-Orthodox into the Orthodox Church do actions like not attending the Sacraments or not keeping the fast days become grave breaches of Canon Law. Little wonder that many conscientious priests, under the weight of this crushing responsibility, contemplate conversions with extreme, sometimes perhaps excessive, hesitation.
The conditions for becoming an Orthodox Christian are simple enough in definition. A properly qualified catechist, after instructing the candidate, must be satisfied that the candidate is genuinely willing and able to accept the religious discipline of the Orthodox Church without reservation, whereupon the formal act of conversion is carried out, either by baptism where the candidate has not been previously baptised in the name of the Holy Trinity, or by the Sacrament of Holyc Chrismation, and the signing. of a letter by which the candidate on the one hand is renouncing his former faith and on the other confessing his Orthodox faith. . . .
Anyone prepared to follow Ruth’s example of total loyalty will be accepted into the Orthodox faith with open arms. But in the absence of such candidates, we should occupy ourselves with the challenge to convert should-be Orthodox, rather than would-be-Orthodox, to Orthodoxy.
If you can manage to slog through the entire article, you'll see a sterling example of how Orthodoxy *can* be cultic in some of its quarters. *Can be*, not is.
Unfortunately, this mentality does get a boost from the teaching of St. Theoplan the Recluse, who when asked if the "heterodox" will be saved, answered thusly:
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.
No pressure. ;>)
As I've implied above, not all Orthodox Christians share this rigorist view. Orthodox theologian Bradley Nassif reacts strongly to it in an article at Orthodoxy Today entitled "Reclaiming The Gospel."
Outside of Orthodoxy, have you noticed how the healthiest Christian communities around today are the ones who preach Christ, not their own denomination? They speak of Jesus, not their "Baptist," "Methodist" or "Pentecostal" identities. Yet, all we seem to hear from our pulpits is "Orthodoxy, Orthodoxy, Orthodoxy!" We are obsessed with self-definition through negation. It is a sick religious addiction. We often shore up our identity as Orthodox by constantly contrasting ourselves with Evangelicals or Catholics. I wish we would talk more about Christian faith, and less about "Orthodoxy."
Orthodox scholar David Bentley Hart speaks to the intense anti-Westernism associated with this "sick religious addiction:
The most damaging consequence . . . of Orthodoxy’s twentieth-century pilgrimage ad fontes—and this is no small irony, given the ecumenical possibilities that opened up all along the way—has been an increase in the intensity of Eastern theology’s anti-Western polemic. Or, rather, an increase in the confidence with which such polemic is uttered. Nor is this only a problem for ecumenism: the anti-Western passion (or, frankly, paranoia) of Lossky and his followers has on occasion led to rather severe distortions of Eastern theology. More to the point here, though, it has made intelligent interpretations of Western Christian theology (which are so very necessary) apparently almost impossible for Orthodox thinkers. Neo-patristic Orthodox scholarship has usually gone hand in hand with some of the most excruciatingly inaccurate treatments of Western theologians that one could imagine—which, quite apart form the harm they do to the collective acuity of Orthodox Christians, can become a source of considerable embarrassment when they fall into the hands of Western scholars who actually know something of the figures that Orthodox scholars choose to caluminiate. When one repairs to modern Orthodox texts, one is almost certain to encounter some wild mischaracterization of one or another Western author; and four figures enjoy a special eminence in Orthodox polemics: Augustine, Anselm, Thomas Aquinas, and John of the Cross.
I am one of an increasing number of people I know who have converted to and then left the Orthodox Church. According to the rigorists cited above, my defection is "disastrous" and I have accordingly "lost my soul forever." What darkened, ignorant, sectarian hooey.
But at least St. Theophan knows better now. ;>)
All this ties into what I wrote earier today: the Anglican Churches, however disordered many of them currently are (Roman and Orthodox disorders to be discussed separately) constitute an authentic branch of the Catholic Church. It makes no difference to us that neither Rome nor Orthodox recognizes us as such, just as it makes no difference to us that the Two One True ChurchesTM are out of communion with each other, and that many in their respective ranks consider the other churches damned schismatics and heretics. We don't find our validation in their opinions, but in historical and confessional fact.
Fr. Oliver Herbel is an Orthodox priest who is doing some good reflection and writing on the phenomenon of why Orthodox Christians, both cradle and convert, leave the Orthodox Church. Hear ye him, not this Fr. Leonidas fellow.