George in exile

As pastor of an evangelical church geographically located in a sea of Eastern Orthodox Christianity, I found the Counterpoints Series book ‘Three Views on Eastern Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism‘ especially helpful in clarifying points of theological divergence, convergence and cooperation between churches that on the surface seem light years apart. Written by theologians in both evangelical and Orthodox camps (converts both ways as well as those who have spent their lives in their parent church), the three views presented are that evangelicalism and Orthodoxy are compatible, are not compatible, and could be compatible.

The book reveals that there is substantial unity between evangelicals and Orthodox concerning the person of Christ, nature of the Trinity, and necessity of redemption. Questions remain concerning the authority given to Tradition and Scripture, the relationship of justification and theosis, the nature of apostolic succession (is it based on continuity of office or continuity of Spirit/gospel?), and whether or not there is only one expression of church allowed by God. As James Stamoolis asks, ‘What differences are permitted, and can new churches be recognized as true churches?’ Important questions.

In his chapter, Bradley Nassif argues from an Orthodox perspective that evangelicalism and Orthodoxy are compatible. Using a definition of evangelical belief proposed in a survey done by the Angus Reid Group, Nassif defines core evangelical beliefs as:

1. Crucicentrism: ‘Through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, God provided a way for the forgiveness of my sins.’
2. Biblicism: ‘The Bible is the inspired word of God and is to be taken literally word for word.’
3. Conversionism: ‘I have committed my life to Christ and consider myself to be a converted Christian.’
4. Activism: ‘It is important to encourage non-Christians to become Christians.’

While many evangelicals would argue that this is minimalism to the extreme, Nassif suggests that these basic elements of evangelicalism can be found in Orthodoxy.

Michael Horton suggested from an evangelical perspective that a major point of incompatibility between evangelicalism and Orthodoxy is the doctrine of justification by faith. In Orthodoxy, justification is subsumed under theosis (if it is discussed at all).

Of course, the conversation was all the more difficult in that we evangelicals have a wide degree of beliefs concerning these things among ourselves. Occasionally, such as in discussions on the Eucharist, Reformed and Lutheran evangelicals had more in common with the Orthodox than they did with Baptist or Pentecostal evangelicals.

In addition to theological considerations, the contributors offered personal anecdotes from their own experiences. Nassif said that, though Orthodox, he came to a personal relationship with Jesus Christ through evangelical Christians. George Hancock-Stefan, a Baptist pastor and theologian from a Romanian Orthodox background, expressed his appreciation for all the Scripture that saturates the Divine Liturgy and how his heart is filled with worship whenever he attends Orthodox Easter and Christmas services with his family.

Occasionally the authors vented their frustrations. Orthodox caricatured evangelicals as shallow and the evangelicals accused the Orthodox of confusing ethnicity with faith. The Orthodox complained of evangelical attempts to convert them, and the evangelicals expressed their hurt at the discrimination and even persecution that they face in predominantly Orthodox countries. Of course, all these accusations are true to an alarming degree, but by and large the contributors tried to judge the other churches by what they could be at their best rather than what they are at their worst.

In the epilogue, James Stamoolis, a convert from the Greek Orthodox Church to evangelical Protestantism and the former theological secretary for IFES, addresses the issue of conversion (both ways). Interestingly, he suggests that Orthodox become evangelical and evangelical become Orthodox for similar reasons. This is true in my own experience with converts (both ways). I’ve noticed that my evangelical friends who converted to Orthodoxy and my Orthodox friends who became evangelical generally all ended up in better places spiritually. There’s something to be said for conversion, regardless of which way. In a separate post I’ll summerize Stamoolis’ observations.

The church I pastor (Nicosia International Church) is an interdenominational church. We deal with issues of cross-denominational compatibility every Sunday. Our faith is most accurately described in the World Evangelical Alliance Statement of Faith, the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed (allowing for diversity concerning the filioque clause), and the Definition of the Council of Chalcedon. We’re broadly Protestant in that we adhere to the ‘5 solas.‘ We’re charismatic in that we practice the gifts of the Spirit.

Yet we’ve discovered that the evangelical message, mission, and mindset is attractive to people from a broad spectrum of church backgrounds, which is why our church attracts such a diverse group of people.

In the introduction to the book, J.I. Packer acknowledges that full communion and structural integration between churches is highly unlikely. But he asks if we can cultivate vision of partnership in proclaiming Jesus Christ as the Savior whom everyone needs, work together to disciple converts, provide pastoral care for all in need, and uphold Christian standards in society.  He calls it a ‘mission-focused ecumenism.’

The questions the book raises are not easy to answer. Yet the discussion itself is progress. My hope and prayer is that some day we can have similar discussions with such respect in Cyprus.

Tags: ecumenism, evangelicalism, Orthodox Church, Orthodoxy, Three Views of Eastern Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism