Fr. Peck's Orthodox essay is gone

Fortunately, Orrologian copied it to his blog:

http://orrologion.blogspot.com/2008/09/on-orthodox-transformation-of-culture.html

Here is the article by Fr. John Peck that J- mentions:

The Orthodox Church of Tomorrow

By Fr. John A. Peck
There is an interesting phenomenon occurring in Orthodox Christianity in America today, and reflected powerfully in our seminaries. Seminaries are loaded almost exclusively with converts, reverts (cradle Orthodox who left the faith, and were re-converted to it again), and the sons and grandsons of clergy.

I believe we are looking at the future of the American Orthodox Church -- today.

The notion that traditionally Orthodox ethnic groups (the group of 'our people' we hear so much about from our primates and hierarchs) are going to populate the ranks of the clergy, and therefore, the Church in the future is, frankly, a pipe dream. Orthodoxy, despite the failings of its leadership, has actually lived up to its own press. The truth of the Orthodox faith, as presented on paper, is actually being believed - by those who have no familial or historical connection with the Orthodox. These poor deluded souls (of which I count myself) actually believe what they are reading about the Orthodox faith, and expect the Church to act like, well, the Church. They refuse to accept the Church as a club of any kind, or closed circle kaffeeklatsch. No old world embassies will be tolerated for much longer - they will go the way of the dodo. No one will have to work against them; they will simply die from atrophy and neglect. The passing away of the Orthodox Church as ethnic club is already taking place. It will come to fruition in a short 10 years, 15 years in larger parishes.

This is a well known problem. Statistical studies taken a mere seven years ago predicted that within 10 years the Orthodox Church in the United States would for all practical purposes, no longer be viable. If nothing was done within five years (that's two years ago) the decline would be irreversible. Demographics determine destiny, as they say. As you may have imagined, not only was "nothing done," such reports were surreptitiously filed away, while the calls for a solution from clergy and laity alike only increased. Larger jurisdictions will, of course, have a little more time, but not a different result.

What we are looking at, of course, is of the highest concern to the hierarchy. They know, in their heart of hearts, that they cannot reverse this trend. Yet they fight a rearguard action, hoping against hope to forestall the historically inevitable movement toward an American Orthodox Church.

The laity has already moved on. Americans, generally, don't fall for very much strong arm intimidation or brow beating, don't go for bullying by insecure leaders, and certainly don't see the value of taking on and promoting someone else's ethnic culture. They care about the Gospel, and the Gospel does not require Slavonic or Koine Greek, or even English for that matter. The Gospel requires context, which is why it cannot be transmitted in any language unknown to the listener.

When we look at our seminaries, we are looking at the Church of Tomorrow, the Church twenty years from now. Indeed, this is the Church we are building today.

Twenty years from now, I anticipate we will see the following:

* Vastly diminished parishes, both in size and number. There will be a few exceptions, (and they will be exceptional!) but for the most part, most current Orthodox parishioners will age and die, and have no one to replace them. Why? Because as they have taught the context of their culture, instead teaching the context of their faith. Some parishes will simply be merged with others. Many will close outright. A few will change how they do ministry, with a new vision of parochial ecclesiology. These newer parishes will be lighthouses of genuine Orthodox piety and experience. Some parishes, I believe, will actually be formed specifically, in the old fashion, by purchasing land, building a chapel or Temple in the midst of it, and parishioners building or buying homes around it. The Church will be the center of their lives, and many will come from far and wide to experience their way of life.

* Publicly renowned Orthodox media and apologetic ministries. These ministries are the ones providing a living and powerful apologetic for the Orthodox faith in our culture (that is, our 21st Century life in the United States), and actually providing the Gospel in its proper context - engaged in society and the public arena. These will succeed in visibility and public awareness more than all the speeches before the U.N. and odd newspaper stories about Orthodox Easter or Folk Dance Festivals could ever do. In other words, the Orthodox Christian faith will become that most dangerous of all things - relevant to the lives of Americans, and known to all Americans as a genuinely American Christian entity.

* More (and younger) bishops. If our current slate of bishops has been mostly a disappointment, reducing their number will only tighten this closed circle, making the hierarchy less and less accessible, and more and more immune to things like, oh, the needs and concerns of their flock. The process of selection for the episcopacy will contain a far more thorough investigation, and men with active homosexual tendencies, psychological problems, insecurities, or addictions will simply not make the cut. We aren't far from open persecution of Christians by secularists in this country, and we need bishops who know the score. With better bishops, no one will be able to 'buy' a priest out of a parish with a gift of cash. Conversely, parish councils will no longer be able to bully priests into staying out of their affairs, and will be required to get out of the restaurant/festival business and get into the soul saving business.

* A very different demographic of clergy. Our priests will be composed of converts, reverts, and the sons and grandsons of venerable, long-suffering clergy. These men all know the score. They won't tolerate nonsense like homosexual clergy (especially bishops), women's ordination, or financial corruption. They will not tolerate the Church being regularly and unapologetically dishonored by her own clergy. Twenty years from now, these convert and revert priests will be sending life-long Orthodox men, a new cradle generation, en masse to our seminaries. They will be white, black, Asian, Polynesian, Hispanic, and everything in between. Fewer will be Russian, Greek, or any other traditionally Orthodox background.

* Orthodox Biblical Studies. Orthodox Biblical scholarship will flourish, and will actually advance Biblical Studies, rather than tag along for the latest trends, staying a minimum safe distance back in case the latest theory tanks unexpectedly. Septuagint studies are already on the rise and Orthodox scholars will usurp the lead in this arena, establishing a powerful and lasting influence in Biblical Studies for decades to come. Orthodox higher education -- specifically in Biblical Studies in the Orthodox tradition -- will finally have a place at the doctoral level in the Western hemisphere, and it will become a thriving academic entity. The whole Church will feed on the gleanings of this new scholarship and Scriptural knowledge, preaching, and Biblical morality will invigorate the Church for generations.

* A much higher moral standard from all clergy. The next twenty years will see a revival of practical ethics. Instead of trailing military or business ethics, the Church will, once again, require the highest standard of ethical and professional behavior from her clergy -- and they will respond! The clergy will not tolerate lying, cheating, or stealing and hold to account those who practice these vices. They will vigorously defend the honor of Christ's priesthood, and Christ's Church. I dare say, even the clergy will finally respect their own priesthood.

* Vocations will explode. As a result of the elevated ethical standard publicly expected from the clergy, candidates in far greater numbers will flock to the priesthood. There will be very full classes, distance education, self-study and continuing education going on in every location. Education at a basal level will disappear, except in introductory parish classes. Clergy will powerfully articulate Orthodoxy to the faithful and to the culture around them. Personal opinion will no longer be the standard for clergy when articulating Orthodox ethics and morality. Our seminaries must become beacons for this teaching, and give up "training culture" once and for all. We will finally begin to penetrate our society, rather than go along for the ride like a tick on a dog's back.

* Philanthropy will flow like the floodgates of heaven. Finally, the many Orthodox Christian philanthropists who annually give millions of dollars to secular institutions will finally find their own Church completely transparent, completely accountable, and worthy of their faith-building support. Let's face it, there is more than enough money in Orthodoxy right now to build hospitals, clinics, schools, colleges, universities, and a new Hagia Sophia right here in the United States. The reason this is not being done is because these philanthropists are intelligent men and women who do not trust the hierarchy to do the right thing with their millions. This will change in short order once it is shown that transparency doesn't destroy the Church, but strengthens it immeasurably. Frankly, I don't anticipate every jurisdiction to do this in the next twenty years, but those that are practicing transparency will emerge as the leaders in every arena of Church existence.

Hope

This all may seem unlikely today, but it is coming.

How do I know this? For one thing, the last holdouts of corruption, Byzantine intrigue and phyletism (a fancy theological term for ethnic preference) are clinging desperately to a vision of the Church that is, quite frankly, dying fast. Oh, they are doing everything to shore up their power and influence, and busy serving their own needs, but their vision is dying. And where there is no vision, the people perish (Proverbs 29:18).

As frightening and disconcerting as it may seem to our leaders, they will learn that emerging from a cocoon, even a Byzantine cocoon, is not a bad thing. Orthodoxy is about to take flight on new beautiful wings. These are the birth pangs of a new era for Orthodoxy. God is giving us a time of freedom and light.

This new Orthodox Church will have a different face, will be ready for contemporary challenges, and will have begun to penetrate American society at every stage and on every level. This Church is the one that will be ready for the challenges of open persecution, fighting for the soul of every American, regardless of their genetic affiliation. This Church will be the one our grandchildren and great grandchildren will grow up in, looking back on the late 20th-early 21st century as a time of sentimental darkness from which burst forth the light of the Gospel. Let it begin.

Fr. John A. Peck is pastor of Prescott Orthodox Church in Prescott, Ariz.

Published: September 16, 2008

I just can't resist this. Forgive me.

In as bad a southern accent as I can fake, "That boy is sho in a Peck of trouble."

I have a number of very good friends in GOA. I've met some wonderful clergy in GOA. This is not intended to be a blanket condemnation of the Greeks by any stretch of the imagination. If you read this that way, you've got what I have to say all wrong.

One gets the impression sometimes that people who are movers and shakers in GOA either are simply unaware of a broader American mission *OR* they are actively and intentionally thinking, "You know, that's nice and all that all you kids want to play pan-Orthodox happy clappy, but you know what? I've got a church to run and a bunch of *Greek* people who pay me to do it. You converts aren't exactly paying the bills, whatever you may think -- it's folks whose last names end in '-opoulos' who write the checks with all the zeros *before* the decimal point, however much it may offend you that they're the same ones who commune once a year, like pews and organs, and have no desire to hear the Divine Liturgy in badly rendered Elizabethan English."

Are they wrong? Dunno. I have friends who were chrismated in an Antiochian church and who, for reasons of where their family are located, want to get married in a GOA parish near home and still have the Antiochian priest serve the wedding. The hoops they're having to jump through to make that happen are near Kafka-esque. It's fine with the GOA priest (who is terrific in *many* respects) but according to him, among other things, the request has to go from Antiochian priest -> Antiochian bishop -> GOA bishop -> GOA priest. According to the Antiochian bishop in question, it needs to go in exactly the opposite direction. "After you." "No, no, no, I insist, after *you*."

What's too bad about the situation with Fr. John Peck -- among may other things -- is that Fr. Andrew, the "vicar" of the Prescott church (I assume that means that Holy Assumption in Scottsdale is the mother parish of the mission) is one of the good guys in GOA, so far as I can tell. Holy Assumption is a very healthy-seeming church (and incidentally, he's a GOA priest who when you ask for a blessing, will actually give it to you -- not all will).

Perhaps Fr. John will be able to get a canonical release to the Antiochians.

The Greeks are the largest jurisdiction, and seem to be the ones (with noble exceptions) most committed to the ethnic aspect of Orthodoxy.

Demography, of course, is destiny. There will be a canonically unified American Orthodox Church, even if I don't live to see it.

Rod,

Thanks for keeping everyone updated on Fr. Peck. As a cradle Catholic imbued with the universality of our approach, I am unfamiliar with the "ethnic" nature of Orthodoxy. However, two of Fr. Peck's comments I found most intriguing:

(1) "Newer parishes will be[come] lighthouses of genuine Orthodox piety and experience ... and actually be formed specifically, in the old fashion, by purchasing land, building a chapel or Temple in the midst of it, and parishioners building or buying homes around it. The Church will be the center of their lives, and many will come from far and wide to experience their way of life."

(2) "We aren't far from open persecution of Christians by secularists in this country, and we need bishops who know the score."

His first quote paints an exciting vision for the Church of the future. The concept will be the same, though the details will be different than they were in the past. In the RCC, we see something of this in the newer lay ecclesiastical movements that have brought so much vitality to Catholic life in the past 40 years (Neo-Catechumenate, Opus Dei, Communion & Liberation, etc., to note just a few).

Re: his second quote, the open persecution is already happening and will increase with ferocity in the years to come. Would recommend that orthodox believers review their history of the French Revolution (and of what happened to Christian believers during the worst of it) and be prepared for struggle if not martyrdom. The French Revolution was the inspiration for most of the horrors that ensued during the Twentieth Century (in Russia, Germany, eastern Europe, Mexico) and which still go on today for Catholic believers (in China, Cuba, Russia, North Korea, south Asia, the Middle East, etc.).

Regarding "bishops who know the score," many in the RCC here in the States "get it" including Baltimore Archbishop Edwin O'Brien and the Boston Archbishop, Cardinal O'Malley.

I'll state right up front, I have no knowledge of the issues of any of the denominations or organizations referenced here.

However, from someone outside looking at Fr Peck's commentary, it reminds me almost eerily of other experiences I've seen and witnessed first hand.

The only one worthy of mentioning is a generational transition within my own church, and I don't mean denomination, just my church itself.

To give perspective: I joined this church from a neighboring one in the early 70's with my family. At this time, it was a brand new facility, vastly expanded from the old, raising seating capacity from about 200 to over 600, and yet, it was so full that if you arrived late, you would have difficulty finding room for 4 to sit together.

The chidren's divisions were jammed to overflowing as well.

I rejoined this church, after having left when my father had to change careers for his health in the mid 70's, and gone through several moves, death in the family marriage, and children of my own in the mid 90's.

A couple years after rejoining, our pastoral staff answered calls to other parts of the world, to other types of service, etc, and a new pastor was recruited. He was invited, and introduced to us all at a potluck.

He asked us to relate what we thought was the greatest challenge facing our church and congregation, and I stood up and made a speech that earned me some bad feelings for a while.

It went something liek this:

I used to be a member here, was gone for about 20 years, and now I'm back. The thing that the biggest impression on my mind after returning and not having even visited for 19 years, as the fact that I recognized the faces of the leadership, those on the platform for services, and the heads of various departments. They are indeed, all the same people, even though nearly a generation has passed since I was here.

I am now in my early 30's and this very facility was envisioned, funds raised, and paid for, mostly by people between 5 and 15 years younger than I am now. They led this church in a magnificient way, and accomplished things I cannot envision, much less accomplish.

When I come here each week, I look around for the people I knew who were my contemporaries before I left, and I can count them on one hand. Yet, the people who are now my age and younger, and are active in this church, but were NOT my aquaintences are even less in number.

To my humiliation, I know that I could not, nor could any of my age group within this church build a new one, pay for it, nor have any of us any knowledge of how it operates, even, much less be active in it's management, operation, or mission.

Your challenge, then, will be to turn people like myself into leadership, teach us how to be leaders, and to find a way to evangelize or otherwise grow our age demographic so that when the generation now in charge is no longer able, by death or infirmity, we actually can keep these doors open, much less become again, a thriving, dynamic, and attractive mission to our community.

The pastor took that challenge. Despite it alienating me from some of the senior leadership, that mission was taken to heart by him and today, our church is thriving and growing, and has taken on a whole new face, purpose, mission, and energy.

Just from the statement posted, I see many of the same type of conflicts and stresses which we observed in our church on a local, microcosm of the larger scale macrocosm of which Fr Peck speaks.

Take heart, my friends. There is a secret to success... If your purpose is to bring Christ to the corner of your world, to become a hospital for sinners, not a showcase for saints, and to meet the needs of the needy - be they spiritual, emotional, cultural, moral, or even physical - you will find you will be successful beyond any estimation or even imagination.

Place that as the priority and all other concerns can be resolved in its light. God is in charge, and when we remember that, things work so amazingly much better.

I am a friend of Fr. John and contacted him last night after hearing the rumor from "an informed source" also. He is still in Prescott. Mp. Gerasimos is upset and Fr. John will not know his fate until October some time. Converts do not understand the sensitivity of the ethnic clergy to criticism of "their people". I was removed from a ministry once for telling a potential visitor that our parish was "predominantly ethnic, the liturgy was 90% English, and the priest was very welcoming to converts". All true. The priest himself removed me and said "I have to protect my people from this kind of racism." Go figure. Any discussion of "culture and faith" by an outsider is percieved as an attack. (Though I have to admit, on the internet is usually is.)

I don't have much experience with the Greek archdiocese, but in the small OCA church in southern Illinoise where I was chrismated I remember one young man named Basil who was cradle Orthodox from the GOA. He confided in me once that if it wasn't for the Orthodox Church in America he would have left Orthodoxy. This is purely anecdotal but it seems to me that if the GOA is driving away their own young people by emphasizing Greekness over Christ then they do indeed have a lot to learn, especially when their young people are far more American than Greek. You can't, then, hold American culture at arms length without pushing your own children, who are now Americans, away as well. It may happen that the GOA simply dissappears while other jurisdictions go on toward Unity. The Ecumenical Patriarch, bu trying to maintain direct control over the GOA as a counterweight to his diminishing flock and influence in Turkey, may ultimately be cutting his Patriarchates throat by alienating everyone else who would otherwise gladly support him while relying almost exclusively on a shrinking Archdiocise in America for support. I suspect a big part of the problem is putting politics before Christ.

While I abstained from posting this news item from the "Intentional Disciples" blog
http://blog.siena.org/2008/09/formational-ecumenism.html
on the earlier thread, (since this related topic engendered its own vigorous exchange at the "Koinonia" blog [ www.palamas.info/2008/09/thoughts-on-our-recent-dialog.html ] my intentions are not to provoke more heat than light, simply to observe that there are alternate "ethnic" paths in the American experience: those authochtonous in their byzantine practices, and those who practice their ancient rites in communion with Rome, such as Maronites, etc.)

Father Peck seems to have assumed that the characteristics he identifies amongst the authochtonous is dead wood that needs pruning, whereas Rome does not see things the same way. Indeed it honors these communities as fruitful and their liturgical life as sacrosanct - not to be meddled with! What does Rome see that Fr. Peck does not? Or what aspect of byzantine witness in America makes it "valid" for the one (Roman Church) but not for the many (ethnic Orthodoxies)?

Could it be communion: that simple acknowledgment that historical constancy is more important than geographical allegiance?

Father Peck has also penned an essay that speaks for the Eastern Catholic Churches in America.

I don't know all the details, but I know there has been much contentiousness in the GOA for some time. Archbishop Spiridon was more or less hounded out of office in the 90's because of conflict between him and the laity. My understanding is the the laity of the GOA have been struggling for greater autonomy from the Partriarchate of Constatinople, and have perceived actions by much of the hierarchy as autocratic and insufficiently cognizant of the needs of the church in America. Apparently Spiridon's predecessor, Iakovos, got in trouble with Constantinople for meetings with other Orthodox bishops in America in which there was some discussion of working towards administrative unification of the various Orthodox groups here, and Spiridon was supposed to "straighten things out". Demetrios, the current Metropolitan, seems more middle-of-the-road, but he's had issues, too. It may be a case of the transition of generations that will ultimately prove Fr. Peck right. Meanwhile, all my best and my prayers to him.

Fr. Peck's essay seemed like pretty small beer to me. I am surprised it was considered controversial in the least.

Of course I am a Southern Baptist, and our fights are considerably more blunt and bloody, for better and worse. Congregational polity and local church governance means no one has to pull any punches, for both good and ill. However I would say that overall it is for good, because people can speak their view of the truth boldly without fearing much consequence.

I was in a hierarchical church once, and most of the clergy were afraid of speaking out for fear of retaliation by bishops. Lots of whispering going on, but not much prophetic witness. Needless to say, this church is rapidly dying, in part because no one feels that they can speak the truth about what is needed to reform.

If Fr. Peck was cashiered for such a direct but tactful essay, I don't hold out much hope for the future of his church.

I would have to disagree with with "lancelot lamar's" implication that "...this church is rapidly dying...". There certainly are Orthodox churches in the USA that are dealing with a decrease in membership, but overall the number of converts and of immigrants (including those finding their faith again) is far greater than the number of people dying or leaving. Far more churches are opening than closing. In the diocese that I am in for the past 15 years, there hasn't been a single church that has closed, and there have been quite a few new missions. Doesn't sound like dying to me!

BTW, his article is still available, if you just know where to look (Google *cough* cache). Make a copy before it is removed from there, if you wish.

>
> The Orthodox Church of Tomorrow
> http://www.aoiusa.org/main/page.php?page_id=112
> By Fr. John A. Peck
> 9/16/2008
>
> There is an interesting phenomenon occurring in Orthodox
Christianity
> in America today, and reflected powerfully in our seminaries.
> Seminaries are loaded almost exclusively with converts, reverts
> (cradle Orthodox who left the faith, and were re-converted to it
> again), and the sons and grandsons of clergy.
>
> I believe we are looking at the future of the American Orthodox
Church
> -- today.
>
> The notion that traditionally Orthodox ethnic groups (the group of
> 'our people' we hear so much about from our primates and hierarchs)
> are going to populate the ranks of the clergy, and therefore, the
> Church in the future is, frankly, a pipe dream. Orthodoxy, despite
the
> failings of its leadership, has actually lived up to its own press.
> The truth of the Orthodox faith, as presented on paper, is actually
> being believed - by those who have no familial or historical
> connection with the Orthodox. These poor deluded souls (of which I
> count myself) actually believe what they are reading about the
> Orthodox faith, and expect the Church to act like, well, the Church.
> They refuse to accept the Church as a club of any kind, or closed
> circle kaffeeklatsch. No old world embassies will be tolerated for
> much longer - they will go the way of the dodo. No one will have to
> work against them; they will simply die from atrophy and neglect.
The
> passing away of the Orthodox Church as ethnic club is already taking
> place. It will come to fruition in a short 10 years, 15 years in
> larger parishes.
>
> This is a well known problem. Statistical studies taken a mere seven
> years ago predicted that within 10 years the Orthodox Church in the
> United States would for all practical purposes, no longer be viable.
> If nothing was done within five years (that's two years ago) the
> decline would be irreversible. Demographics determine destiny, as
they
> say. As you may have imagined, not only was "nothing done," such
> reports were surreptitiously filed away, while the calls for a
> solution from clergy and laity alike only increased. Larger
> jurisdictions will, of course, have a little more time, but not a
> different result.
>
> What we are looking at, of course, is of the highest concern to the
> hierarchy. They know, in their heart of hearts, that they cannot
> reverse this trend. Yet they fight a rearguard action, hoping
against
> hope to forestall the historically inevitable movement toward an
> American Orthodox Church.
>
> The laity has already moved on. Americans, generally, don't fall for
> very much strong arm intimidation or brow beating, don't go for
> bullying by insecure leaders, and certainly don't see the value of
> taking on and promoting someone else's ethnic culture. They care
about
> the Gospel, and the Gospel does not require Slavonic or Koine Greek,
> or even English for that matter. The Gospel requires context, which
is
> why it cannot be transmitted in any language unknown to the
listener.
>
> When we look at our seminaries, we are looking at the Church of
> Tomorrow, the Church twenty years from now. Indeed, this is the
Church
> we are building today.
>
> Twenty years from now, I anticipate we will see the following:
>
> * Vastly diminished parishes, both in size and number. There will
be a
> few exceptions, (and they will be exceptional!) but for the most
part,
> most current Orthodox parishioners will age and die, and have no one
> to replace them. Why? Because as they have taught the context of
their
> culture, instead teaching the context of their faith. Some parishes
> will simply be merged with others. Many will close outright. A few
> will change how they do ministry, with a new vision of parochial
> ecclesiology. These newer parishes will be lighthouses of genuine
> Orthodox piety and experience. Some parishes, I believe, will
actually
> be formed specifically, in the old fashion, by purchasing land,
> building a chapel or Temple in the midst of it, and parishioners
> building or buying homes around it. The Church will be the center of
> their lives, and many will come from far and wide to experience
their
> way of life.
>
> * Publicly renowned Orthodox media and apologetic ministries. These
> ministries are the ones providing a living and powerful apologetic
for
> the Orthodox faith in our culture (that is, our 21st Century life in
> the United States), and actually providing the Gospel in its proper
> context - engaged in society and the public arena. These will
succeed
> in visibility and public awareness more than all the speeches before
> the U.N. and odd newspaper stories about Orthodox Easter or Folk
Dance
> Festivals could ever do. In other words, the Orthodox Christian
faith
> will become that most dangerous of all things - relevant to the
lives
> of Americans, and known to all Americans as a genuinely American
> Christian entity.
>
> * More (and younger) bishops. If our current slate of bishops has
been
> mostly a disappointment, reducing their number will only tighten
this
> closed circle, making the hierarchy less and less accessible, and
more
> and more immune to things like, oh, the needs and concerns of their
> flock. The process of selection for the episcopacy will contain a
far
> more thorough investigation, and men with active homosexual
> tendencies, psychological problems, insecurities, or addictions will
> simply not make the cut. We aren't far from open persecution of
> Christians by secularists in this country, and we need bishops who
> know the score. With better bishops, no one will be able to 'buy' a
> priest out of a parish with a gift of cash. Conversely, parish
> councils will no longer be able to bully priests into staying out of
> their affairs, and will be required to get out of the
> restaurant/festival business and get into the soul saving business.
>
> * A very different demographic of clergy. Our priests will be
composed
> of converts, reverts, and the sons and grandsons of venerable,
> long-suffering clergy. These men all know the score. They won't
> tolerate nonsense like homosexual clergy (especially bishops),
women's
> ordination, or financial corruption. They will not tolerate the
Church
> being regularly and unapologetically dishonored by her own clergy.
> Twenty years from now, these convert and revert priests will be
> sending life-long Orthodox men, a new cradle generation, en masse to
> our seminaries. They will be white, black, Asian, Polynesian,
> Hispanic, and everything in between. Fewer will be Russian, Greek,
or
> any other traditionally Orthodox background.
>
> * Orthodox Biblical Studies. Orthodox Biblical scholarship will
> flourish, and will actually advance Biblical Studies, rather than
tag
> along for the latest trends, staying a minimum safe distance back in
> case the latest theory tanks unexpectedly. Septuagint studies are
> already on the rise and Orthodox scholars will usurp the lead in
this
> arena, establishing a powerful and lasting influence in Biblical
> Studies for decades to come. Orthodox higher education --
specifically
> in Biblical Studies in the Orthodox tradition -- will finally have a
> place at the doctoral level in the Western hemisphere, and it will
> become a thriving academic entity. The whole Church will feed on the
> gleanings of this new scholarship and Scriptural knowledge,
preaching,
> and Biblical morality will invigorate the Church for generations.
>
> * A much higher moral standard from all clergy. The next twenty
years
> will see a revival of practical ethics. Instead of trailing military
> or business ethics, the Church will, once again, require the highest
> standard of ethical and professional behavior from her clergy -- and
> they will respond! The clergy will not tolerate lying, cheating, or
> stealing and hold to account those who practice these vices. They
will
> vigorously defend the honor of Christ's priesthood, and Christ's
> Church. I dare say, even the clergy will finally respect their own
> priesthood.
>
> * Vocations will explode. As a result of the elevated ethical
standard
> publicly expected from the clergy, candidates in far greater numbers
> will flock to the priesthood. There will be very full classes,
> distance education, self-study and continuing education going on in
> every location. Education at a basal level will disappear, except in
> introductory parish classes. Clergy will powerfully articulate
> Orthodoxy to the faithful and to the culture around them. Personal
> opinion will no longer be the standard for clergy when articulating
> Orthodox ethics and morality. Our seminaries must become beacons for
> this teaching, and give up "training culture" once and for all. We
> will finally begin to penetrate our society, rather than go along
for
> the ride like a tick on a dog's back.
>
> * Philanthropy will flow like the floodgates of heaven. Finally, the
> many Orthodox Christian philanthropists who annually give millions
of
> dollars to secular institutions will finally find their own Church
> completely transparent, completely accountable, and worthy of their
> faith-building support. Let's face it, there is more than enough
money
> in Orthodoxy right now to build hospitals, clinics, schools,
colleges,
> universities, and a new Hagia Sophia right here in the United
States.
> The reason this is not being done is because these philanthropists
are
> intelligent men and women who do not trust the hierarchy to do the
> right thing with their millions. This will change in short order
once
> it is shown that transparency doesn't destroy the Church, but
> strengthens it immeasurably. Frankly, I don't anticipate every
> jurisdiction to do this in the next twenty years, but those that are
> practicing transparency will emerge as the leaders in every arena of
> Church existence.
>
> Hope
> This all may seem unlikely today, but it is coming.
>
> How do I know this? For one thing, the last holdouts of corruption,
> Byzantine intrigue and phyletism (a fancy theological term for
ethnic
> preference) are clinging desperately to a vision of the Church that
> is, quite frankly, dying fast. Oh, they are doing everything to
shore
> up their power and influence, and busy serving their own needs, but
> their vision is dying. And where there is no vision, the people
perish
> (Proverbs 29:18).
>
> As frightening and disconcerting as it may seem to our leaders, they
> will learn that emerging from a cocoon, even a Byzantine cocoon, is
> not a bad thing. Orthodoxy is about to take flight on new beautiful
> wings. These are the birth pangs of a new era for Orthodoxy. God is
> giving us a time of freedom and light.
>
> This new Orthodox Church will have a different face, will be ready
for
> contemporary challenges, and will have begun to penetrate American
> society at every stage and on every level. This Church is the one
that
> will be ready for the challenges of open persecution, fighting for
the
> soul of every American, regardless of their genetic affiliation.
This
> Church will be the one our grandchildren and great grandchildren
will
> grow up in, looking back on the late 20th-early 21st century as a
time
> of sentimental darkness from which burst forth the light of the
> Gospel. Let it begin.
>
> Fr. John A. Peck is pastor of Prescott Orthodox Church in Prescott,
Ariz.

To me legitimate conversion would be based on knowledge and conviction, of someone old enough to commit in an informed and thoughtful way, as opposed to people baptized as infants who go on to fill the rolls for several generations as cultural members only. People can enter in infancy, childhood, or their teens, and far from all of them end up to be the strength of the faithful. So it seems we see the cycling from cooling off and falling away, back to increased interest and growth through outside conversions, then cooling and falling away once again when many of the many biological children who were simply born into the church decide that it's not their thing, and so on again. I think it's natural and follows exactly what we see with families throughout the Bible.

I am neither Orthodox nor Greek, but I thought it a thoughtful, loving essay. I grieve that this Church, which claims to follow the man who said, "I am the truth," is so afraid of telling it like it is. They have by their actions allied themselves with something quite other than the truth.

So what is Fr. Peck in trouble for? What's the bishop(s) officially angry about? Or are his parishioners ticked off?

Sadly another crucifixion. When will it stop,hopefully soon. i have seen this hap[pen time and time again eg. Fr. Demetrios Carellas,Fr, Hans Jacobse etc. etc.

Shlomo Lkhoolkhoon (Peace to you all in Syriac-Aramaic)

After reading Fr. Peck's essay, I almost felt that he had been reading what we Maronites have been going through.

First, I would like to disabuse Clare Krishan's notion (just to let you know Clare, I am just correcting your points) that the Eastern Catholic Churches are "alternate "ethnic" paths in the American experience..." within the Catholic Church. We are not. We are full Churches within the Catholic Communion Of Churches, and are of equal dignity and respect as the Roman (Latin) Church. Clare you state: "...whereas Rome does not see things the same way. Indeed it honors these communities as fruitful and their liturgical life as sacrosanct - not to be meddled with! What does Rome see that Fr. Peck does not? Or what aspect of byzantine witness in America makes it "valid" for the one (Roman Church) but not for the many (ethnic Orthodoxies)?"

First, as I pointed out, the Eastern Catholic Churches are equal with the Roman Church and are not part of it. The pope is only the pope, he is not our patriarch. It is only through our patriarchs (in my case) or the ruling heirarchs (as is the case for many other Eastern Catholics) that we are in communion with the pope and the Church of Rome.

You also seem to mistake Holy Tradition with national tradition. Holy Tradition "has its own natural ways of expressing Catholicism according to proper language, native customs, discipline, theology, spirituality and liturgy." (From Captivated By Your Teachings: A Resource Book For Adult Maronite Catholics, by Fr. Anthony Salim) For example within the Maronite Holy Tradition, most of the Qorbono (Divine Liturgy) is suppose to be done in the the vulnacular of the nation we are in, with a few exceptions where Syriac is mandated (the Words of Institution are one of those). Here in the United States the vulnacular is English. Whereas in the Armenian Catholic Church the litugical language is Classical Armenian no matter where you are. The idea that one must be Lebanese to be Maronite or Armenian to follow the Armenian Holy Tradition is a false. And such ideas would suprise Fr. Brown (a professor at the Unitversity of Dayton who is African-American and a Maronite priest; or Fr. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, the Dutch born former head of the Jesuits and a priest of the Armenian Catholic Church.

Now I would like to deal quickly with a couple of points Goodguyex made. First, he is correct when he talks about the negatives that we Eastern Catholics have. I would like to correct him, and point out that we are Eastern Catholics nor Eastern Rite Catholics.

I will add Fr. John to my prayers tonight.

Fush BaShlomo Lkhoolkhoon (Stay in Peace you all)

Also allowing married clergy at all ranks is the only way to have a future for both the RCC and the Orthodox. The missing element has been policing leadership ranks. If married men had leadership posts there is no chance at all the horror of transferring a gay who liked teen boys to further parishes would ever have happened.

Q: Why do 'Orthodox' bishops protect the 'ethnic dimension' above doing the teachings?

A: Those parishioners who care more about the ethnic dimension don't care about whether the bishop walks the talk, is a not celibate gay, etc. So they have a deal. Fr. Peck's article threatens the deal, made notice of the pink elephant in the living room and got him in hot water.

That's why you see Orthodox leadership making kissy with the Vatican types. Who would otherwise want to be seen with a leadership that deemed it wise to protect higher level clerics that transferred teen boy loving gays to new towns one step ahead of an altar boy's dad with a gun for years? All about putting lipstick on the pig of protection and comfort in retirement.

To my Brother Priests of Jesus Christ:

There is certainly much in Fr. John’s article, The Orthodox Church of Tomorrow, to agree to, to ponder, to discuss, to disturb and to inspire. I read the article when it was first posted, and bandied comments back and forth with a small group of trusted priest brothers in my diocese; the fact that we do so in private, carefully and discretely speaks for itself.

Some of what Fr. John said was old news, which we needed to hear nevertheless. The superstructure of our American church administrations is most assuredly in decline. The ethnic clubs of the past, whether they are Greek or some other ethnic variety, speak not at all to the faith of those who struggle to purify the passions and draw near to the Holy Things. The intense struggles that the regular priest in any parish must face as he battles unchecked human wills in the typical parish council meeting, not to mention Bible study or that hotbed of unchecked passion, the Kliros, are degrading, antithetical to the Great Commission that all of us have been given. All of this just said from a priest who has served a little mission for a little less than two years (I’m a fast learner, though) after two decades of formation in the Orthodox Church as a layman, a deacon, an assistant priest, and even more years before as a decade-long pastor of an ethnic protestant tradition (yes, they exist, and are remarkable similar in their dysfunctions to those of our own beloved Orthodox Church.)

I shared Fr. John’s article with one of my most trusted spiritual sons. He made the sign of the cross and smiled. “Excellent,” he said. “Excellent?” I asked with some exasperation. “Excellent,” he repeated. “There are still one or two of you who are unafraid to speak the truth regardless of the consequences.”

I won’t say how THAT conversation went. But, alas, he is right. He sees the truth and discerns the Holy Things. More about this I cannot say either. But he sees a time of trouble ahead for all of us, symbolized at the moment in this instance by what appears to be the heavy-handed discipline laid upon a priest who spoke the truth. I only have a few things to say about this (five, to be exact). You are, of course, free to stop reading. I understand. Who am I to say these things? But the Spirit blows where He wills, and I will say what I discern it to be necessary and right to say, openly. May I give right glory to Him!

First, about that persecution. No one seems to know what happened to Fr. John. I’ve asked my spiritual father, my brother priests and looked for answers on the Internet. Was he disciplined because of what he said? If so, why? Was he disobedient to a hierarch who told him not to publish his article? Or, did his words embarrass a hierarch who was accused in his heart over the truth of what he wrote? Disobedience would be a terrible thing. But if Fr. John was not disobedient, and spoke in the Spirit, as Christ calls Him and indeed all of us to do, then “Blessed are they who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake!” Our love and our prayers and our support must go out to him. We need to stop hiding in the shadows like roaches and come out to stand together for Christ, if we are to be His priests.

Second, about the Orthodox Church of tomorrow. I know nothing about demographics or statistics. I accept the conclusions of those who do know. Still, I have some experience with the ethnic parishes of the tradition in which I had served so many years ago before I was chrismated in the Holy Orthodox Church two decades ago. They are virtually all gone. Yes, gone. The people I loved and served, to whom I preached “po slovenksy” so long ago: gone. Their parishes have either closed or been diminished to small remnants of whatever their protestant tradition now allows; I do not know, and I refuse to look back. This will happen to us as well, unless the migrations continue to feed our ethnic parishes with new blood from the mother churches across the sea. But what I do know is that there is life in the alternative: life in new communities that form not around this or that ethnic identity, but around the Great Physician of our souls and bodies, Jesus Christ. But this will require a willingness to embrace new models of the priesthood and new models of parish life.


Third, the model of smaller and more intense communities. The Church will survive as a community of those who come to be healed – not as ethnic club, not as spinner of endless programs (Good Lord, is there no end to them!), not as social center, not as a place of nostalgia or remembrance of things past. The Church will survive as a hospital for the sick, the sick who come to receive the Holy Things of the Spirit. This is what is happening before my eyes in my little mission. Because of only a few people (one or two is all it takes), who truly discern the Holy Things and who have supported my priesthood – only a little leaven leavens the whole loaf – I have a collection of sick people who come to be healed; these form the core of my Community: a few “graduates” of this or that 12-step program, a few who have messed up their lives in other ways, and who have realized that they have nowhere else to go. (Yes, that’s it, isn’t it? To Whom CAN we go? Only you, Lord, have the words of eternal life.) To be sure, I also do have a few ethnic pockets of this or that old country tradition, a few worldly pockets who want the 7-11 model of the church, as my spiritual father calls it, a few who try to impose their nostalgia for remembrance of this or that past on all of us; but I will not have it. My task has been to stand face to face with them and try, sometimes with sheer guts, to point out their need for what God alone gives. Once, reacting to my directness, the parish council urged more money and a vacation on me; how strange was that meeting, and how sickening!

Fourth, the model of the worker priest. I would never suggest that worker priesthood should be the only model for the priesthood, but I humbly suggest that it should be one that takes its place next to the full-time priesthood with equal dignity and honor. Well, OK, maybe that’s too much to ask; at least with equal acceptance. Smaller communities of people who are very sick cannot support a full-time priesthood. They will come, and they may even tithe; but the widow’s mite, given in purity, still cannot support a priest and his family. This means that the priest may need to have an alternate means of income as well. I know the dangers, and it’s important that I admit them too: this alternate income, I think, should be one of necessity only. The priest must be the priest at all times, and his service to the Lord in his priesthood must be everything; that is, the priesthood may not be a secondary or extra-curricular activity; it must be everything. The priest must rely no less on the love of God, on the mercy of God, than he expects his people to do. He must give all to Christ, and do what Christ leads him to do in the priesthood. There can be no idea here of having it both ways: the world and the kingdom. Nor can there be any notion of the priest finding solace in his worldly employment; shame on him if he does; we must never labor for the bread that does not satisfy. Forgive my preaching, but here I preach to myself; the dangers are real, and I am all too aware of them as a worker priest myself.

Fifth, if you’re still reading that is, where do we go and what do we do? We stop competing with one another. We stop measuring our success on the basis of our parish income, our attendance, our recognition. We support one another and speak with brutal honesty and truth about the Holy Things, actually about ALL things, to our people and to one other as priests. We let the Spirit blow where He wills. We love one another, support one another, and embrace one another in our common priesthood. Let us not be ashamed of our Lord; let us be forthright, honest, fearless. If I am to be corrected, so be it; correct me in love. The time is coming when we will all need to be clear about Whom we serve and what we are about. We will need to allow the sword of the Spirit to slice through the nonsense. This is something all of us know, but all too soon we will need to stand together and act on it – together, as priests of the Living God.

Priest Elias
Westminster, MD

Fr. Gregory Peck should do well to find a new jurisdiction which promotes Christian thinking. As an established Orthodox priest, it is time for him to move on if the Church cannot get out of it's ethnic ghettos.