Higher

Published by The National Herald, September 24, 2004

“I Talk To A Higher Father.”

By Amb. Patrick N. Theros
Special to The National Herald

With those words, President George W. Bush confirmed what we have known now for some years: religion has become a dominant factor in American politics.

A declaration of religious faith became a sine qua non of political qualification in 20th century elections. In the 21st century, we seem to have drifted into a requirement that politicians practice what they preach in terms of religion.

The fact that the Founding Fathers, the gentlemen who wrote our Constitution, included a significant number of Deists–somewhat like today’s Agnostics–has slipped from our memory.

However, the conduct of the current electoral campaign has manifested a new trend: that the candidate conducts himself politically according to the requirements of his specific religious sect or sub-sect.

Certain Roman Catholic Bishops have announced that Roman Catholic politicians who do not vote to impose Roman Catholic Canon Law on the United States cannot receive Holy Communion. One Bishop allegedly announced that Roman Catholics who vote for such candidates should suffer Church sanction.

This reassertion of medieval Papal practices once delighted the historical traditionalist in me. In another camp, American policy in the Middle East increasingly seems to be formulated in fundamentalist Protestant pulpits. Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson now practically write the policy papers that were once drafted by America’s diplomats. Understandably, American foreign policy cannot be left in the hands of a diplomatic corps that was once largely Anglican and did not subscribe to the belief that we can (and should) force Armageddon and the Second Coming by establishing the State of Israel. The Defense Department defends a senior General who preaches in uniform that his Protestant God is the Real One, while the God of Muslims (and presumably Jews, Catholics, and Orthodox) is a graven Idol. Furthermore, Catholic Bishops and Protestant Preachers have made it clear that voters should vote as their religion demands. Our President’s desire to stop stem-cell research and ban abortion clearly stems from his commitment to his personal sectarian beliefs.

This is all well and good for Catholics and fundamentalist Protestants. They have been told the rules and know how to vote in order to avoid going to Hell. Some Muslim and Jewish preachers have made it equally clear how their constituents should vote as well. But what about us poor Orthodox? Our clergy have been derelict in its duties. Neither the Patriarch, nor our Archbishop, has yet told us how to vote. Even the aggressive Archbishop Christodoulos in Athens has yet to add a faith-based dimension to his mostly nationalist political demands.

Are we orphaned, or is our clergy too cowardly to excommunicate us if we vote wrong? Is it not a sin to keep us in the dark and allow us to sin in ignorance?

So, as our clergy has failed in its responsibilities to enlighten us politically, I would like to take a stab at it. Please read the rest of this article carefully and follow its instructions faithfully.

The Orthodox Church demands, absolutely, that the faithful think! The Church demands that the faithful weigh the consequences of their actions, examine their motivations carefully, and then take full personal responsibility for their actions.

For those interested in a more detailed explanation, I recommend they read the first few chapters of “The Great Church in Captivity, (Cambridge University Press, 1986),” by Stephen Runciman, an extremely erudite historian who converted to Orthodoxy while writing the most authoritative history of the Crusades.

To simplify Runciman, the Orthodox Christian is personally responsible for his decisions to sin. Each decision is a separate decision based on self-examination of motives and a careful balancing of consequences. It is not simply the lesser evil but a question of why you are doing this. Are you selfish or do you delight in the misery of others? Does profit come before the common good? Ask yourself and vote.

If you insist on knowing the view of the Church, please examine them carefully. I regret that the general decline in Orthodox education, the closing of Halki, and conversion of Holy Cross into a trade school for parish priests have robbed us of an Orthodox theological knowledge. I will take the liberty of illustrating Orthodoxy’s historical views on a number of subjects that I believe relevant to the 2004 elections. First and foremost, Orthodoxy has no concept of a Just War. War can be justifiable only if not going to war is the worst possible course of action.

War for revenge, war for profit and war for the lust of killing must be confessed as possible sins. Maximizing profit is fine but destroying the livelihood of others can only be justified if you honestly believe that firing employees will avoid a greater evil. We are all responsible for our fellow human beings. Abortion is wrong but the Church has consistently held that the act is not abortion until the fetus moves. Furthermore, if the choice is between the death or incapacitation of the mother and the orphaning of other children or a medical intervention in the first four months of pregnancy, what do you believe is the correct choice? Oddly, this was the official position of the Papacy at the end of the 19th century! Finally, there is a strictly Orthodox concept of “oikonomia,” the doctrine that whatever decision we make must have a minimum of bad consequences.

This, of course, raises another question. Why are Protestant and Catholic clergy so willing to tell their flocks how to vote? Again, the answer comes from Runciman. The Western Church established itself on the basis of Roman law. The Church, like the Emperor, decrees and the flock—preferably an ignorant flock—obeys. Orthodox Christianity developed its theology in the context of Greek philosophy and the emphasis on free thought. Even the liturgical formulas reflect this difference. A Catholic priest says: “I baptise you.” An Orthodox priest says “The servant of God (name) IS baptised.”

Western Christianity further developed during the Middle Ages and the period of feudalism. During the Dark Ages, the nobility and the Church agreed that they needed each other and that keeping the peasantry obedient was in their mutual interest.

This history continues to define all Western Christians, Catholic and Protestant.

The only other ethno-religious group that seems to share the Greek Orthodox passion for Free Thought is the Jews. Despite the fact that President Bush is the most militantly pro-Israeli President in our history, all polls indicate that no less than 75 percent of Jews will vote Kerry.



Volume 6 Number 39 - Tuesday, September 28th, 2004	A Publication of the ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN LAITY