Further Discussion about "Semi Conversion"

Good evening, dear readers.

My Orthodox brother in the Lord Subdeacon Joseph had some further comments about this subject, so I've decided to address these further.  He wrote the following in a comment:

One who wholeheartedly believes in all Orthodox theology and doctrine".... there is the crux of the problem. "Semi-converts" accept SOME of the Orthodox doctrine, along with SOME of their former doctrine, as the Orthodox doctrine. (I am specifically referring to things at variance with Orthodoxy).

I am also confused as to how you could make the SJC liturgy the core of a Western rite service.

Well, let's start with the second question first.

I'll admit that when I first decided to make the Western Rite my home in Holy Orthodoxy, I thought of an obvious question:  If Byzantine Rite Orthodox object to The Liturgy of Saint Tikhon because of it's rootedness in the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, why didn't someone come up with an approach that placed the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom at the center of things and then build around it with the western forms and customs the Western Rite has that stand apart from the Saint Tikhon Liturgy?

If this approach had been looked at first, the worship of Western Rite Orthodox Christians and Eastern Rite Christians would at least share the same words of the core liturgy used.

So I've pictured how this might work as follows:

You replace the Mass or Divine Liturgy in a current Western Rite service with the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom.

You leave the rest of the services intact, including the collects of the day, which are treasured by those coming from the Anglican and Lutheran traditions.  You examine these collects closely to make sure they conform to Holy Orthodoxy.

You leave the use of Anglican Plainchant and Gregorian Chant intact in Western Rite Services.

You leave the Hymnody intact, including the use of the Saint Ambrose Hymnal and the 1940 Episcopal Hymnal that those parishes that came into Orthodoxy from the Anglican tradition brought with them.

You leave the customs intact, including the blessing of birthdays and anniversaries and the prayers of the people. You leave the use of western style vestments intact. You allow praying of the Rosary as well as use of The Jesus Prayer.  You allow the use of The Stations of the Cross.

And finally, you allow the music programs of these parishes to continue with full choirs, pipe organs, pianos and the like.

This approach could have been taken, however when the disaffected Anglicans of the 1970's entered Holy Orthodoxy, they wanted to bring a cleaned up version of the 1928 BCP with them. Bishop Bellavin who later became Saint Tikhon had already gone over the Anglican Book of Common Prayer many years before, along with some other Orthodox assistants and had produced a version compatible with Eastern Orthodox theology.

The Anglicans had fought a major battle over the 1928 Prayerbook in the Episcopal Church and had also battled against Women's Ordination to the Diaconate and Priesthood.  They lost these battles and the so-called 1979 "Book of Common Prayer" was adopted in the Episcopal Church. As a result, many of these traditionally minded Anglicans were forced all the way out of their former church homes.    

My theory is that Metropolitan Phillip and other Antiochian Leaders in an attempt to be gracious to these battle weary Anglicans who desired to enter the Orthodox Church allowed the Liturgies of Saint Tikhon and the Liturgies of Saint Gregory to stand in the Antiochian jurisdiction.

One of the attachments to the 1928 Book of Common prayer re-worked into the Liturgy of Saint Tikhon was the use of the "Old English" or "King James English" in its pages.

The Anglicans of the 1970's distrusted all "Novus Ordo" type liturgical innovations, having been burned by the 1979 BCP controversy.  This distrust of modern English usage included Orthodox translations of The Divine Liturgy into modern English.

My journey into Eastern Orthodoxy came at a later time.  We finally converted in 2006, with developments in this direction taking place beginning in the 1980's and stretching into the 1990's.  Some of the influences that started me in this direction were those of C.S. Lewis and Dr. Francis Schaeffer.  

My wife and I were not as hung up over the use of "King James English" as those who came before us into the Western Rite of Holy Orthodoxy.  We are products of a different time.

My wife was raised an Episcopalian, but later became a "born again" worshipper at an Assembly of God church in Colorado Springs.  During her college days, she attended Baptist Churches and Protestant College Campus groups.

I attended Biola University, transferred to Colorado Baptist University, took graduate courses at Pat Robertson's Regent University, and evolved from my Baptist roots through different Anglican jurisdictions, spent a year and a half in the LCMS Lutheran Church waiting for a time when my wife might convert to Holy Orthodoxy, and then finally made the journey to Saint Mark's in Denver while maintaining ties to Saint Catherine's Greek Orthodox Church in Greenwood Village.

With this background in Evangelical and Charismatic circles, the main versions of the Bible that I encountered were the New International Version, the New King James, The Revised Standard, and finally the English Standard Version, which is actually a pretty good translation.

When our conversion to Orthodoxy was complete, we picked up a copy of the Orthodox Study Bible, which features a new Old Testament translation from the Septuagint paired with the New Testament translation taken from the New King James version of the Bible. 

I was taught to love traditional language and music by my mother, who raised me in a way that is unusual in this day and age.  It was due to her influence that I moved in the Orthodox direction.  The Roman Catholic Church was implementing Vatican II during this time and most of the Protestant world was following their lead and "modernizing" everything to do with worship and church music.

About "Semi Conversion" to Holy Orthodoxy

Sudeacon Joseph has said that many of us who convert to Holy Orthodoxy only semi convert. But here is another way to look at it:  God leads many of us who are converts from western christian confessions and traditions by steadily divorcing us from our past errors and moving us ever closer in the direction of Orthodox beliefs.

In my case, God had to first cleanse me of common Baptist errors such as Pre-millenial Dispensationalism, Rapturist and Antinomian "Personal Savior" easy believism and "Eternal Security" heresies.

Then, he had to separate me from other protestant errors such as "Semi - Deism" where certain gifts of the Holy Spirit were for a bygone age and no longer operative in modern times and where a person could not expect to be delivered from demonic bondage and oppression or supernaturally healed of diseases or distresses.

He also had to instill in me a love of the Holy Eucharist and Liturgical worship and He had to break me of protestant iconoclasm.  Time spent as an Anglican helped greatly with this process.

Perhaps the biggest false doctrine God had to bring me out of was the belief that Jesus could be my Savior without being The Lord of my life.

And finally, God brought me to Holy Orthodoxy when my own belief system was turned on it's head:  Instead of believing that one decision had saved me, I fell into the despair of believing that one sin had damned me forever.  Saint Silouan's holy example became a help to me later, since he went through similar struggles.

It was easy for Satan to turn heterodox doctrines against me to the detriment of my soul. Heresy is cruel to its adherents.

I have accepted every basic Eastern Orthodox doctrine that has been presented to me, but I will say this: ALL CHRISTIANS SOMETIMES DOUBT ASPECTS OF THEIR OWN FAITH.

And I've run into Eastern Rite Orthodox who don't observe any of the fasting disciplines of The Church, who don't regularly go to Confession, who hardly ever partake of the Eucharist, and whose women don't cover their heads or dress modestly.

So the problem of "semi-conversion" would not just appear to be a Western Rite issue.

Again, I would mention that Subdeacon Joseph is a member of the clergy, and as such is probably much more devoted in his faith than some of the ordinary laymen and laywomen of many an Orthodox parish.

I, too, as a minor order member of the clerical ranks, am probably more interested in these matters than some laymen and laywomen who just try to go about their daily lives in humble, if simple obedience to our Church.

I believe that with the scandal of the division of Christians, that all of us sometimes have doubts.  One of my deepest frustrations is that there are four ancient christian groups who name the name of "Christian" who claim the exclusive title of The Church:  These are, of course, the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church, and the Chaldean Church, or The Assyrian Church of the East.

I have settled on Holy Orthodoxy as being the purest form of Christianity that exists, but I've come to realize that even though we are The Church, that the "Ancient Undivided Christian Church" we always talk about persisted, but the people who called themselves "Christians" did suffer from divisions starting in A.D. 431 with the second major division taking place in A.D. 461.

And so I've often asked this question:  "Why didn't The Lord appear to these ancient christians at these key times and stave off these divisions?  And why if Church Unity is so important, did not all the Bishops refuse to budge until the Holy Spirit brought them back to unity?"

The right conclusion, even if somewhat unsatisfying at times is the following:  He allowed us our free will and we divided one from another in our fallenness.

Even though I've come to accept that The Church is, indeed, Infallible, I know that her members certainly aren't.  I first accepted this belief because I concluded that the alternative of a fallible church was a terrible one, and unacceptable.

It is hard to get a complete handle on "Things that are at variance with Orthodoxy."  It is easy to get the basics right, but there are more complicated matters that only the highest ranks of the clergy and monastics came truly come to grips with, and these over hundreds of years.

This is why The Rudder is a record of all the decisions about canon law without being a completely binding document for Orthodox Christians.  Some of the canons have been deemed to be culturally bound to the times they were written in.

This is why we have "Great Synods of the Orthodox Church" every now and then.  So we can iron out certain things through the guidance of the Holy Spirit working through the clergy and laity until agreement is reached.

As Orthodox Christians, we no more take the Bible alone than we take the Canons alone.  Sola Scriptura does not apply, neither does Sola Canonica.  The living tradition of The Church becomes the final arbiter.

So these thoughts above are my best attempt at trying to address the questions raised by my brother in Christ.

Fr. John Connely, my priest, believes that The Book of Common Prayer can be a valid form to worship God with.  So do the leaders of the Western Rite movement in Holy Orthodoxy.

These matters are for The Church to decide, and not us as individuals.  And for now, Antioch has allowed the use of these liturgies to stand.

Is it possible that God will reverse these decisions?  I suppose so.  He is God.  Let Him do what is Right in His Eyes.

But I believe that some form of The Western Rite movement is here to stay.

I believe this because I don't believe He would allow the Roman Catholics to be better at something than we who are The Church are at something.

Why would he be more compassionate with them and working through them than with us and through us?

That wouldn't make any sense at all.

I think the fact that the Roman Catholic Church is setting up an alternative Anglican structure at this time, and the fact that Metropolitan Jonah has been reportedly setting up a similar arrangement might mean The Holy Spirit is at work.

I also think that these high ranking leaders keep in contact with each other more than we know.

This past Sunday I heard from a subdeacon at my parish that Bishop Hilarion was at the Vatican two weeks ago.  Bishop Hilarion knows Metropolitan Kyrill, and Metropolitan Kyrill of Russia knows Metropolitan Jonah.  And I'm sure Pope Benedict knows all three of these Holy men.

These Christian leaders are responsible men.  I'm sure as responsible men, they realize it is important to keep in touch with one another for the sake of a unified Christian witness to the watching world.

So my guess is that some "cross-pollenization" might be taking place.

We need to expect great things from our Great God.  He is able to bring our schisms to an end, and we need to expect that He might do so.

There need be no division between Eastern Rite Orthodox and Western Rite Orthodox.  If there is a division, it is our fault and not God's.

My conclusion is this:  Apparent shortcomings of Western Rite Orthodox Christians in the view of Eastern Rite Orthodox Christians are sometimes more a matter of culture than a matter of falling short of our Holy religion.  Let us think the best of each other and not the worst.

Sincerely in the Blessed Trinity,

Columba Silouan