Orthodoxy and Ethnicity

By Franklin Billerbeck

From the now defunct periodical Anglican Orthodox Pilgrim, Vol. 2, No. 1, Winter 1993

Upon hearing I was likely to leave The Episcopal Church and become Orthodox, a then leading member of ESA remarked: How could you? The Orthodox are so, so ethnic! Indeed, many Anglicans perceive Orthodoxy as an ethnic labyrinth in which no foreigner can long survive. They would have you believe that most Anglicans who join Orthodoxy soon return home: unable to endure the ethnic enclave they believe is Orthodoxy. To them, Orthodoxy is a strange, forbidding mystery, a world which no westerner can hope to understand.

Such a view simply does not square with the facts. There are many converts, a number from Anglicanism, who are very happy in Orthodoxy. Unfortunately, many Anglicans merely assume the Orthodox are too ethnic. Convinced their assumption is correct, without of course ever having seriously examined the issue for themselves, they simply write off Orthodoxy as not viable. But if orthodoxy is not viable for westerners, how do you explain that 2,000 hard core Protestant Evangelicals have found a home and a mission in Orthodoxy? They have now been Orthodox for about 6 years—long enough for any honeymoon to end! If fundamentalists can make the transition, surely Anglicans can. If westerners can't survive in Orthodoxy, how do you explain that over one-half of the clergy in the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese are converts! If Orthodoxy is so foreign, how do you explain that The Collect for Purity (Almighty God, unto whom all hearts are open all desires known…) is in an Orthodox Liturgy? No, your name does not need to end in opolous or inski to be Orthodox. In fact, Heers, Reeves, Olnhausen, Green, Trigg, O'Callaghan, Doyle, McCauley, Morse, Grossman, and Gillquist are all names of people who are happily Orthodox.

Surprised? You shouldn't be. After all, Orthodoxy claims to be nothing less than the catholic (universal) church. The same church which our Lord commanded to go and teach all nations. This includes America. It also should come as no surprise then that there are English people who are Orthodox, Japanese people who are Orthodox, Arabs who are Orthodox, Ugandans who are Orthodox, and Indonesians who are Orthodox. Closer to home, the Orthodox have significant missionary activity ranging from Mexico and the Caribbean in the south, to Alaska in the north; nevermind the missionary activity to average Americans within the continental 48 states (the Antiochian Orthodox, for example, have tripled in size in the past 25 years).

Anglican Ethnicity

Indeed, Orthodoxy embraces all cultures and ethnicities, even Anglican. There is even an Orthodox Liturgy based largely on The Book of Common Prayer, the Divine Liturgy of St. Tikhon. And, yes, Anglicans are ethnic. Looking back on Anglicanism, I am surprised to realize how truly ethnic it is. Consider the terms: guild, vestry, undercroft—they have an ethnic identification. There is also a certain Anglican aloofness, formality and even perhaps arrogance. Consider, for example, Delafield, Wisconsin. In a city of 5,000 people where The Episcopal Church has fewer than 100 baptized members, the local church, pardon me, Episcopal Church, used to proclaim itself as: The parish church of Delafield. Why? Are there here shades of English ethnicity, of being the state church? Moreover, when seeking the local Episcopal Church, you can often tell the building by its architecture, if not, at least in the United States, by its red doors.

Hyfrydol (the traditional tune to Alleluia! Sing to Jesus) and the Healey Willan communion setting are both characteristic hallmarks of an Anglican congregation. For that matter, so is the Anglo-Catholic practice of twirling a censor in a 360 degree circle (or its variant, the Queen Anne twirl, roughly resembling a figure eight). Anglican identity is historically grounded largely, not in what it is, but in what it is not. It has played itself off, found its identity, largely by contrast to others. Thus it is not Roman Catholic but claims to be catholic.

Though not Roman Catholic it is not Fundamentalist, for it retains the seven sacraments. It is not eastern, but it claims to be Orthodox. The real problem is to identify exactly what Anglicanism is. This is a part of Anglican culture and a real part of the Anglican mindset. Moreover also in Anglicanism is lack of a doctrinal basis—there is no confessional statement akin to that used in many protestant denominations (e.g. Westminster Confession), no clear method to interpret Holy Scripture, and, frankly, little serious attention to doctrine. Indeed, the doctrinal differences amongst Anglicans are startling and Anglican doctrinal ambiguity classic. Notable too are the movements that periodically change the face of Anglicanism: Elizabethan Anglicanism, Classical Anglicanism, Anglo-Catholicism, &c. Mind you that a cross on the altar (not to mention statues or icons) was not always well received, as the Church of the Advent in Boston can testify to.

Also inherent to the Anglican mindset is the notion of a fractured church, i.e. the branch theory and the notion that each has a part of the Truth. The notion that there is only one church, with one identifiable structure, as Scripture says and Tradition bears witness to, which alone possesses the fullness of the faith, that any other church is simply not holding that fullness of the faith once delivered and is in error, is, frankly, a concept alien to Anglican thought.

Equally alien to Anglican thought is the notion that heresy can have eternal consequences. With such a mindset and approach to doctrine, it hardly seems a surprise that Anglicans, unlike the undivided church, seem soft on heresy. In fact, the notion of denying communion for doctrinal reasons is not even listed in the Book of Common Prayer 1979. Read the reasons for denying communion on p. 409 under Disciplinary Rubrics. Notoriously evil life, done wrong and are a scandal and hatred are the only reasons listed. No clear word about doctrine here! Notoriously evil, at least in current practice, does not include such things as practicing homosexual acts. Not surprising then is that some Anglican clergy who become Orthodox and are ordained to the priesthood find it a challenge to pastor a congregation where doctrine is not an issue and is not open for dialogue or debate; where the real issue is sin.

As a group, Anglicans tend to be genteel and cultured. There is a particular sense of Anglican decorum, even to the point of absurdity. Part of this cultural identity includes the notion that it is improper to cause a row. Thus many Anglican congregations would probably find it a shock to have their priest condemn, from the pulpit, abortion as murder and to deny communion to someone who helped procure an abortion. Yet this is exactly what the Sixth Ecumenical Council teaches! Anglicans would be stunned if a deacon hurled the Book of the Gospels at Bishop Spong and denounced him as a heretic. Yet it was none other than Athanasius who hurled the Gospel Book during an ecumenical council. Rather than respond in horror, Anglicans apparently see nothing wrong with reciting the Nicene Creed with bishops who reject its explicit teaching; apparently they see no contradiction between claiming to uphold the Nicene/Constantinopolitan faith, as expressed by the Nicene Creed, and sharing communion with heretics who reject that faith—nevermind that the same councils which proclaimed the creed, excommunicated those who rejected the faith expressed therein. Is it really so outrageous to expect that Anglicans, who claim to be catholic, refuse to share Eucharist with those who view Christianity as but one view of Truth, who reject the authority of Scripture, ordain practicing, unrepentant homosexuals, bless same sex marriages, and question the Virgin Birth? But of course such blunt action is hardly in the Anglican mindset. Such a position would likely be viewed as being radically conservative.

Anglican ethnicity is rooted in the British Isles and in the particularly English experience and worldview. In the United States, Episcopalianism was traditionally associated with the upper social class of society. To be Episcopalian was often viewed as being part of the powerful, elite and often wealthy element in society. The Episcopal church has even been referred to as the Republican party at prayer. To the extent that one really values this identity, they could view becoming Orthodox as going to a lower class and thus not a desirable option.

Anglicans looking at Orthodoxy will soon realize their own ethnicity. They may also come to realize much of their ethnicity is valued and cherished. Remember that Orthodoxy, because it is the fullness of the faith once delivered and offered to the entire world, embraces, transforms and makes new all cultures. Moreover, before 1054, England was herself fully Orthodox and a number of English saints are to this day commemorated in the Orthodox calendar.

Fusing Faith and Culture: The Orthodox Approach

Precisely because Orthodoxy claims to be catholic (universal), it is at once both the ultimate expression of one's ethnicity and the ultimate rejection of ethnicity. Because ethnicity is absorbed into the faith, the faith becomes the ultimate, God centered, expression of ethnicity. Because the faith ultimately transcends ethnicity and creates a deeper unity than any ethnic bond, the faith is also the ultimate rejection of ethnicity.

It works like this. Take the case of Russia. When missionaries went into Russia the entire nation ultimately became Orthodox. The entire culture became drenched in the Orthodox faith. All of life, its customs, its habits, its expressions became immersed in and an integral part of the Russian expression of the Orthodox faith. Yet the culture retained its unique characteristics—Russians did not have to give up being Russian to become Orthodox. The culture was absorbed into the faith and the faith permeated all aspects of the culture. Russian culture and ethnic identity was, like all things, made new in Christ Jesus. The uniqueness of the Russian culture was thus given its ultimate expression—it was made part of the Kingdom. Thus the Russian expression of Orthodoxy is and ought to be different than the Greek expression of the same faith. But the same faith unites Greeks and Russians into something more, namely, the body of Christ, the church.

Orthodoxy embraces and cherishes culture and cultural difference. Rather than cut off and isolate church as something alien to our everyday life, a box we fill on Sundays from 10:00–11:00, for the Orthodox, culture becomes a means of expressing and living our faith every day. Faith and culture are fused. As a result it becomes hard even to conceive of being Russian without being Orthodox, or being Greek without being Orthodox. And herein lies the problem.

Our culture has not yet been baptized into Orthodoxy. Thus we conceive of Greeks and Russians as Orthodox but they are different from us. We view their faith as something unique to their culture and not adaptable to ours. We view their faith as so cultural that we cannot readily conceive of it as being universal; we can't conceive of being Orthodox without also being Greek or Russian. Indeed, the same holds true for some Orthodox in America—thus they might ask you: Are you Greek? If you say No, but I'm Orthodox or No, but I want to learn about the Orthodox faith, you may startle them for a minute, but then they will likely accept you. After all, the Orthodox are very aware that people of various cultures are Orthodox and they are very accepting of cultural difference while valuing and preserving their own unique cultural identity. To an Orthodox it would seem unthinkable to ask you to deny your ethnicity to become Orthodox. After all, ethnic identity is simply part of being human. Thus when Ethiopians, for example, attend St. George's Greek Orthodox church in St. Paul, MN, they are not asked to give up their culture. They are accepted as Orthodox and their culture is valued as being part of who they are: fellow Orthodox Christians. Naturally the respect is mutual. Orthodoxy's ability to fuse culture and faith is a great strength but also, in a way, a great weakness, especially in America.

When immigrants came to the United States, they banded together; thus easing their transition into an alien America and preserving their culture and their faith. Many immigrants were delighted just to be in America. Their goal was to be accepted. Because of the link between culture and faith, they were careful to preserve both. What they failed to see was the golden opportunity to make America Orthodox. Rather than try and do missionary work and convert America, they tried to retain their faith and their culture as an isolated box of their existence, while simultaneously trying to be accepted by society at large, to be recognized as true Americans. That is changing.

An Emerging American Orthodoxy

As the Orthodox church here in the new world takes in many converts and as the generations become further removed from the old country, Orthodoxy in America is changing in two respects. First, it is becoming missionary minded. The goal is to convert America to Orthodoxy! The goal of some Antiochian Orthodox is to plant 500 new churches by the year 2000. Orthodox are becoming less concerned about being accepted as legitimate members of American society and more concerned with making American society Christian. Thus we seek to proclaim our faith and to critique and confront American culture. We stand, for example, unequivocally opposed to abortion (murder) on demand, to immoral sexual practices such as homosexuality, to instant gratification as the driving force of life, abuse of various kinds, and environmental suicide (yes, environmental issues are theological issues). We affirm the dignity of human life, the centrality of the family, the need for work and sacrifice, and the equal but different roles of men and women. American culture has yet to be baptized into Orthodoxy. The mission of Orthodoxy in America is not unlike that of the our earlier mission to the ancient Roman world: win the people and the nation for Jesus Christ.

Second, what is gradually emerging is a uniquely American expression of Orthodoxy. We are very early into this process. But what is starting to happen is only natural. People of various ethnic groups born and raised in America are going to incorporate their own culture into their expression of the Orthodox faith. The faith will not change. The expression of that faith will become uniquely American, just as there is a uniquely Russian and a uniquely Greek expression of the Orthodox faith. Thus such things as, for example, pews and organs (largely unknown in the old country) may become a normal part of the American expression of Orthodoxy. American musical expressions may well find a place in the life of the church in much the same way that there is a distinct Greek chant and a distinct Russian chant. Such a change will come about very gradually—it will not be imposed from on high. Anglican converts to Orthodoxy have a wonderful opportunity to contribute to this process. Entire congregations can come over and preserve their unique identity and character. Indeed, because America is a melting pot, it seems likely that a variety of ethnicities will find continued expression within American Orthodoxy. Ultimately, the goal is to make America, with all of its various cultures, truly Orthodox so that our culture, our thinking, our expression is so united with the faith, that it is almost impossible to conceive of being American without being Orthodox.

Are the Orthodox ethnic? Yes, and both we converts and the native Orthodox are proud of our ethnicity. Our heritage is part of who we are.

Practically What One Might Find

Enter then into an Orthodox church and who knows what ethnicity you will discover. The liturgy may be in English, Greek, Arabic, Spanish, Old Church Slavonic or a combination of these. It depends upon the needs of the local congregation. As that congregation changes, its needs may change too. In Madison, Wis. the local Orthodox church uses about 48% English, 48% Greek and 4% Old Church Slavonic. St. Mary's Greek Orthodox Church in Minneapolis uses almost all English, whereas St. George's Greek Orthodox Church in St. Paul, Minn. has more Greek. Our Antiochian Orthodox Mission in Mequon has never so much as used a kyrie eleison, let alone Agios O Theos (Holy God). Remember that the church must adapt to the needs of her members. The liturgy you will encounter will most likely be that of St. John Chrysostom—eastern rite. It might be in traditional English (with Thee and Thou) or it might be in contemporary idiom (with You and Your). If you attend a Western Rite parish under Antiochian jurisdiction, you would likely encounter the Divine Liturgy of St. Tikhon, based on the Book of Common Prayer. Besides language and liturgy, you might also be able to expand your culinary horizons!

What about those interminably long services the Orthodox are noted for? Well, only the spiritually weak complain about services being too long! But realistically, the average celebration of the Eucharist takes about an hour and a quarter to an hour and a half, (or just about as long as many Anglican celebrations) depending upon communions and sermon. Of course special occasions last longer. And you might also be able to attend Matins (Morning Prayer) before the Eucharist. Matins takes about 45 minutes and, unfortunately, is often poorly attended.

I've found the Orthodox to be very warm and welcoming once you get to know them. Again, it varies from congregation to congregation. Some congregations make you feel welcome from day one on; in other congregations it takes a while to get to know the people. Like Episcopalians, making everybody feel welcome on their first visit is not always our strong suit.

Moreover, at first Orthodoxy will likely feel strange and foreign. This is normal. Take your time. Do some study of the faith and the Orthodox approach (it is different than the western approach). Take time to get familiar with the eastern liturgy—it will grow on you! A relationship with the church, like true love as distinguished from infatuation, rarely happens overnight—rather it grows and develops over time. Indeed, part of the process of conversion is creating a new circle of friends and readjusting old relationships. Your true friends will support you in whatever decision you make. Some may be happy for you and some may feel hurt and angry. There is no way of knowing. Ultimately, of course, neither ethnicity nor friendship is a criteria for choosing a church. The only ultimate criteria is Truth.

But don't let this discourage you. The good and important things in life always take time. Remember that one congregation does not the entire church make and congregations vary. Take time to get to know as many Orthodox as you can. Be sure to try and attend some national conferences. I was truly stunned by how many former Anglicans I met at the Pastoral/Liturgical institute held at St. Vladimir's Seminary. Indeed, one contact just kept leading to another. When I spoke with Fr. Fester, the Evangelism Officer for the Orthodox Church in America, I asked him to take a quick guess, off the top of his head as they say, what percentage of clergy and what percentage of lay people in the OCA (Orthodox Church in America, one of the major Orthodox jurisdictions in the United States) were converts. At least 25%, or one in four, in each category, he replied. Of course it varies from area to area and even parish to parish. Further investigation revealed former Anglicans, now Orthodox, were to be found from Florida to Massachusetts and from Texas to California. There is even a former Anglican monastic community, now Orthodox, alive and well in Georgia. And they have been Orthodox for about fifteen years now. Moreover, fully one-third of all OCA bishops are converts and Bishop Seraphim, Bishop of Ottawa and the Archdiocese of Canada, is a former Anglican. Historically, The Episcopal Church has been a conduit for people journeying into Orthodoxy. This was noted by Sara Loft in her study of converts to Orthodoxy within the OCA (Converts Respond, Orthodox Church in America, Syosset, New York 1984, p.3 [available from Orthodox Christian Publications Center, P.O. Box 588, Wayne, N.J. 07474-0588]). In her study of converts, Loft found that from 1978–1983, 24% of the converts were former Episcopalians! The only group larger was Roman Catholic with 33%. From 1953–1983, clearly a much longer period, 21% of the converts were Episcopalian and 30% Roman Catholic. In both cases, Episcopalians were the second largest group of converts to Orthodoxy! And in the Antiochian jurisdiction, in the past few years no fewer than eight congregations have been formed primarily from Anglicans.

From Baltimore, MD to Concord CA, and from Milwaukee, WI to Fort Worth, TX Anglicans are coming home to Orthodoxy. Indeed, the person I mentioned in the introduction who told me the Orthodox were so, so ethnic, turned out to become Orthodox herself less than a year latter. Before you just write off Orthodoxy period, or dismiss it as being too ethnic, do some investigating on your own. Granted, some Episcopalians have had bad experiences with Orthodoxy (I personally know of at least two such cases) but there are many, many Anglicans (literally hundreds), who have found in Orthodoxy a home which only the fullness of the faith could provide. You owe it to yourself to go beyond the boundaries of Anglicanism and actually get in touch with the Orthodox. Don't hesitate to contact former Anglicans, now Orthodox—they can be of great help both because they know Orthodoxy and they know Anglicanism; in a word, we share with you a common heritage, a common culture. Take your time. Don't judge Orthodoxy by one quick visit anymore than you would judge a book by its cover or a TV program by one 10 second sound bite. In the end, I am sure you want to be only where Our Lord wants you to be.

If you are looking at options, I would ask that you investigate Orthodoxy and give it a fair investigation. Pray, read, study and take to heart the words of Philip to Nathanael: Come and See.