Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky Institute of Eastern Christian Studies Windle House, University of Toronto

The University of Toronto is one of the most complicated institutions I have ever encountered. Its complexity seems to grow daily, and the results are rife with possibilities. From very early on, it seems, this university was open to various forms of federation, collaboration, and association. Its college system was modeled on the storied colleges of Oxford and Cambridge. This allowed various ecclesiastically affiliated colleges (universities with their own charters and right to impart accredited degrees) eventually to be federated with the University of Toronto.

Let me provide what is a brief but probably vastly oversimplified description:

The three great examples of this are the University of Trinity College (High Church Anglican); Victoria University (United Church of Canada) with Emmanuel College, its theological faculty; and the University of St. Michael’s College (Roman Catholic, under the aegis of the Congregation of St. Basil).

Read More

The Transfiguration of the Saviour

That there exists in God a real distinction between His essence and His energies, theologians assure us, is an irreformable dogma of the Orthodox Church. If so, it is a curious dogma, originating in a question that most ordinary believers today would find arcane and probably irrelevant to their lives: Is the light experienced by those who practice the hesychastic method created or uncreated? In this short article I raise four questions that urgently need to be addressed by Orthodox theologians and scholars.

1). How is dogma established in the Orthodox Church?

The distinction between the divine essence and the divine energies was asserted in the 14th century by a series of local synods, the two most important being the 1341 and 1351 Synods of Constantinople. Their Tomes were subsequently received as expressing authentic Orthodox doctrine; but precisely what level of authority do they enjoy? The question is not easily answered. Some claim that they possess an infallible authority equivalent to that of the 1st-millennium Ecumenical Councils. These individuals even name the hesychastic synods collectively as the Ninth Ecumenical Council—but this is private opinion, lacking consensual and conciliar support. The 2016 Holy and Great Council describes them as possessing “universal authority,” along with several other 2nd-millennium synods, but given the refusal of several Churches to attend the Council, the authority of Crete remains a matter of dispute. Read More

On August 27 Orthodoxy in Dialogue published an editorial entitled, “Same-Sex Love: The Church Needs a Conversation.” We stand in awe of Gregg Webb’s courage in publicly putting a human face on this appeal.

Gregg Webb

All of my life I have been Orthodox. My decision to pursue life as a member of the Eastern Orthodox Church is a commitment I must make daily each time I recite the Nicene Creed in my morning prayers.

My daily struggle to keep the faith is complicated by my persistent romantic and physical attraction to other men. As a gay man existing within an Eastern Orthodox culture, I’ve often struggled to find space to simply be. It quite often feels like I have to push into the mire of Orthodox culture to make even a small place to simply exist, rather than something that I’m welcomed into.

I’ve continually chosen to commit, and recommit myself, to what I believe is the true teaching of the ancient Christian Church regarding sex and marriage. I’ve chosen to pursue celibacy as a way of life to maintain cohesion both with my values and theology, as well as those of my Church. This places me in an often difficult and challenging place on the boundary lines of many of today’s fiercest debates.

As a celibate gay man, and more broadly as a sexual minority existing in the Orthodox Church today, I have wrestled to find my place within theology and within the Church. I’ve struggled to identify thinkers and theologians, as well as pastors and caretakers, who I believe have a vested interest in truly understanding and pressing into the more complicated areas of my life. Read More

This is the third article in our Reformation 500 Series.

Philip Melanchthon

Though largely unknown to modern Christians, appeals to the Greek Church in both rhetorical usage and actual correspondence were pivotal during the formative years of the Reformation. In 1519, during the Leipzig Debate against Catholic interlocutor, Johann Eck, Martin Luther stated that the Greek Church had never accepted Rome’s claim to papal supremacy, and that it was the Greek Church that had produced the early Church’s finest theologians.

This and other comments made by Luther during his lifetime reveal that he held a generally positive view of the Greek Orthodox tradition, though his statements about the Greek Church were often made for polemical purposes. As such, many have concluded that Luther never engaged with the Orthodox tradition in any meaningful way, and that his statements should be viewed in this light.

The same, however, cannot be alleged of Luther’s comrade, Philip Melanchthon.  Melanchthon has been called the mind behind the Reformation, a claim evidenced by the fact that he was the primary author and editor of the Augsburg Confession. He was a gifted linguist who excelled in both Greek and Latin, and was as familiar with the Church Fathers as was feasible during the 16^th century. In his seminal work, Loci Communes, he makes several references to Church Fathers, including St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil the Great, and St. Gregory the Theologian. Melanchthon also demonstrates a profound interest in church history. Read More