Beyond Bells and Smells:
The Gap between Eastern and Western Christianity
A short while ago I received an email newsletter from Musalaha, a ministry of reconciliation among Israelis and Palestinians. Salim Munayer, the director, laments the fact that western study tours often do a fine job of teaching about the ancient biblical sites and historical geography of the region, but rarely provide an opportunity for tour participants to learn about Eastern Christianity. Salim is one of the guest speakers on my tour. He has given me permission to repost his article. It can also be found on the Musalaha home page (although in time it may be moved).
By Salim J. Munayer
This
past week, as America commemorated the tragedy of 9/11, much was said
about the gap between the Western world and the Muslim world. One
important aspect that was overlooked in this discussion is the gap
between the Western and Eastern church. I would like to share some of
my experiences and observations in this area.
I
regularly teach American Christian students on short-term study trips
in the Holy Land. I often notice a weakness in their curriculum, as much
time is spent studying biblical history, particularly the first and
second temple periods, and the apostolic period. But when we begin to
discuss the ecumenical councils and their resulting doctrinal schisms, I
find that my students have spent little time studying the historical
and political contexts in which church history took some of its most
significant turns. Instead, their curriculum fast forwards hundreds of
years to the sixteenth century, into the time of Martin Luther and the
Protestant Reformation, and the subsequent politics and history of this
period.
Such
a selective reading of church history tends to focus on the
contribution of the Western Church which is understood as the normative
framework of Christian theology and church tradition. Consequently, the
development of the Eastern Church, in which the Arabic speaking
community plays and has played a large role, is often completely
ignored. Furthermore, a new branch of study in post-holocaust theology
has created willingness and attached importance to understanding
contemporary Jewish faith and practice. This is rarely matched with
inquiry into the Eastern Church. This has led me to believe that there
are far too many passionate evangelical Christians in the West who are
unaware of the history, theology, and contemporary situation of the
Eastern Church.
This
is problematic for several reasons. Firstly, this means that the role
of the Eastern Church in developing and shaping both Western and Eastern
Church doctrine is not properly understood or appreciated. Secondly, a
wealth of theological tradition has been ignored by many in the
evangelical and wider Protestant community to the detriment of their
theological appreciation and understanding. Thirdly, the precarious
positions of the Arabic speaking church around the world, and
particularly in the Middle East, means that we are in great need of
acknowledgement, encouragement and support from our western evangelical
brothers and sisters. This short article will therefore attempt to
explore some of the reasons why the western evangelical church is
unfamiliar with Arabic speaking Christianity as a preliminary attempt to
remove some of these barriers and encourage mutual understanding
between the traditions, as well as to further us along the path of
reconciliation in the Holy Land.
The Early Church Schisms
Contrary
to popular belief, the early church schisms in the fourth and fifth
centuries were not exclusively, or even primarily, a result of doctrinal
differences, but occurred to some extent as a consequence of political
struggles for territory, governance and authority. These political
struggles were then couched in theological language at a time when the
early church was attempting to combat heresy and articulate a basic
statement of core beliefs for the faithful. Imperial and ecclesiastical
agendas became somewhat intertwined.
In
the early fourth century, Christianity had five main centres throughout
the Roman Empire: Rome, Alexandria, Carthage, Constantinople and
Antioch. Each territory was presided over by a Bishop with authority
over the churches in his district and into its hinterland. The Roman
Emperor Constantine wanted to unify these disparate territories as a way
of asserting political control.
Consequently,
he invited Bishops from all over the Empire to attend a council in
Nicaea near Constantinople in 325 AD in order to obtain this theological
and political unification. The ecclesial framework of these churches’
relationship and interaction was established at early councils such as
this one. Subsequent church conflicts were not only theological, but
political.[1]
Linguistic, Cultural and Ethnic Separation
Much
later, the Pope in Rome excommunicated the Patriarch in Constantinople
and the latter responded in kind. It is important for us to view the
doctrinal controversies in this wider political context and not as
exclusively theological issues. Doing so will hopefully remove some of
the religious and theological objections that western evangelical
Christians may have toward the Eastern Church. The primary consequences
of these splits for us today are the ethnic and cultural barriers that
were erected as the churches spread to different parts of the world –
the Western Church into Europe, the Orthodox Church into the Arabic
speaking world, and the non-Chalcedonian churches into Asia and Africa.
Bringing us into the present, it is the cultural and ethnic barriers
resulting from these ancient political decisions which I believe are
currently the main source of estrangement between western evangelicals
and Catholic or Greek Orthodox Arab Christians, not the theological
differences between the churches. As such, these can be overcome through
increased contact between the cultures which will increase
understanding and address mutual alienation and misunderstanding.
There
have of course been far-reaching theological consequences as a result
of the linguistic and cultural barriers which now exist. Arabic and
Syriac are not widely read in the evangelical church in the way that
Greek and Latin are. This has meant that the theology and church
teachings of the Eastern Church have not been available to most Western
Christians. This wealth of theological tradition has therefore played
little role in developing and shaping the theology of the West, to the
detriment of the Western Church.
Perceived Theological Differences and Difference in Church Practice
Although
there are clearly many differences between Eastern and Western
Christianity, these differences do not need to be viewed, as they often
are, as a source of conflict or disagreement, but should instead be
understood as an attempt to contextualize the Christian faith within the
social context of each church community. In the West, more emphasis is
placed on individual autonomy in theology and church practice. For
example, the doctrine of justification is one which deals with
individuals and one’s particular relationship with God.[2]
While worshipping as a collective body, we often simply sing side by
side. In the Eastern Church, the emphasis on liturgy and sacraments is
driven by communal identification. It is understood that these
traditions tie Christians to the global church body, and to the saints
in heaven. All too often the evangelical church criticizes these
historical practices as indicating a stagnant church, in contrast to the
lively worship style of the Western Church, and in so doing,
misunderstands the deep theology and religious commitment behind these
rituals.
Similarly,
the Western Evangelical Church places a strong emphasis on the
immediacy of revelation and understanding through personal experiences
with the Holy Spirit in the charismatic church, and through Scripture in
more conservative evangelical traditions. In contrast, the Eastern
Church places a strong emphasis on the historical nature of revelation.
Revelation is viewed as a more collective endeavour over centuries of
church teaching, study and theology by numerous clergy and laity, and
this revelation is intrinsically tied to church tradition as implemented
in church practice. The Eastern Church emphasizes that Scripture is
never immediately applicable but that the text today has a history which
is intimately related to the history of the church as the church has
sought to relate the revelation of Jesus to contemporary discourse over
the centuries. [3]
While one attains to truth therefore through rigorous engagement with
scripture - and our biblical criticism must always concede to the need
for such an acceptance of the canon - we must nevertheless recognize
that the text we receive is already interpreted for us by church
tradition, and that this interpretation has a measure of authority.
While
it would be naive to disregard these important theological and
ecclesial differences, they do not need to be a source of estrangement.
However there is a tendency in the Western Church to understand itself
as normative, having developed within a majority culture, meaning that
anything which deviates from this normative theological or ecclesial
framework is in some sense heretical. Through embracing our ecclesial
diversity however, we enter a richer faith community.
Political Barriers
The
Arab conquests in the seventh century coupled with the spread of Islam
and the subsequent wars between Christians and Muslim political powers
such as the Arab invasions, the Crusades, the Ottoman invasions of
Europe, World War I, the creation of the State of Israel and now two
Gulf Wars have also disrupted the relationship between the Eastern and
Western Church.
By
the early nineteenth century, western travellers in the Muslim world
became more common and painted a vivid Orientalist picture of this
ill-understood other. This was perhaps an improvement to the very
limited contact between East and West that preceded it, however this
began a rather skewed relationship between those with the power to
narrate and those whose lives were ostensibly narrated in such
discourses. Even our contemporary understanding of Arabic speaking
Christians, and Eastern Christianity more generally, comes largely
through western media which is influenced by geo-political interests
which often ignore the situation of the church. We know little about the
recent history of the Assyrian church in Iraq, or the Armenian Church
in Ottoman Turkey for example, because reporting on these situations of
persecution and genocide would harm international relationships and
alliances.
Conclusion
It
is clear from the brief overview given above that there are many things
which have historically contributed to the current state of
estrangement between the western evangelical church and the wider
Protestant community and the Eastern Churches. Cultural and linguistic
barriers pose the most significant challenges which are often couched in
unnecessary theological language. While there are clearly theological
differences between the two communities, these are often a result of
their interaction with secularism in the West, and Islam in the East as
opposed to significant doctrinal variations. The possibility for
increased mutual understanding and interaction is, therefore,
significant.
It
is incredibly important that these current barriers are explored and
overcome, not only as engagement with the other would enhance the
richness of each side’s respective theological resources, but in a
climate of political instability (particularly in the Middle East),
Arabic speaking Christians are in desperate need of recognition and
support from their western brothers and sisters. Additionally,
understanding the differences between the two ecclesial traditions will
allow us to bridge some of the gaps between the Messianic Jewish
community and the Palestinian Christian community, as the Messianic
community is influenced more by Western theology than Eastern theology,
and the opposite is true of the Palestinian community. Furthermore,
engagement could help lessen the existing prejudices between the Eastern
and Western Church. A global church seeking increased unity and
understanding would surely be a testimony to Jesus’ reconciling activity
in the world today, as well as a source of strength to the universal
church itself.
Further Reading
· Bailey, Kenneth. Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels (Illinois, Intervarsity Press, 2008).
· Cragg, Kenneth. The Arab Christian: A History in the Middle East (Kentucky, Westminster/John Knox Press, 1991).
· Pacini, Andrea, eds. Christian Communities in the Arab Middle East: The Challenge of the Future (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998).
· Parry, Ken, eds. The Blackwell Companion to Eastern Christianity (West Sussex, Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2010).
· Strengholt, Jos. Gospel in the Air (Boekencentrum, Zoetermeer, 2008).
· Tarazi, Paul. ‘An Orthodox Christian Response to the Inclusive Language Lectionary’. Word Magazine (Publication of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, 1984).
[1] For more information, see the section for further reading at the end of the article.
[2] It
should be noted, however, that recent scholarship such as the New
Perspectives on Paul, has challenged the individualism of the doctrine
of justification.
[3]
Tarazi, Paul. 1984. An Orthodox Christian Response to the Inclusive
Language Lectionary, Word Magazine, Publication of the Antiochian
Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, 8-11.
Posts
