M
Marybeloved
Guest
Brilliant! 
Alright, I was with you for a little while, then you lost me. Cases that curbed the open/public practice or teaching of religion date back far before the 1960s or whenever most Catholic “traditionalists” think that the USA started going to hell in a handbasket. The only difference between now and then is the increasing pace with which society is becoming secularized (and Islamicized, in the case of certain parts of Western Europe). It is alarming, yes, but I’m still not quite sure how this makes Orthodoxy better to deal with things, at least not in the societies that you mentioned (the ex-communist societies). While statistically speaking Russia is a very “Orthodox” country (i.e., most ethnic Russians are Orthodox), their rates of weekly attendance at liturgy are abysmal (I’ve read something as small as 2-4%), abortion is still high, alcoholism is rampant, etc. The mere existence of Orthodoxy (or Catholicism) in a given place cannot heal society’s ills. People need to come to it, and be transformed by it. “The time is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him.”
So, even though I am Orthodox myself, I am going to have to say no, Orthodoxy is not somehow inherently better to deal with today’s society. I should say, though, that this is not because Orthodoxy cannot deal with modern problems, but because the problems of the average person are not being met by the majority forms of religion in western societies. But even then, I’m not sure that Orthodoxy, in and of itself, could fix that. The problem is in people, not necessarily the people’s religion. No one wants to hear “Take up your cross and follow Me”, no one wants to fast 200+ days out of the year, etc. But those things are still what we do. I remember once listening to an interview with a convert to the Antiochian EO church, Rod Dhrier (sp), who made the statement about Muslims that we (Westerners/Americans) need to be a lot more realistic about who Muslims are and who they want to be and how they want to live, because many Muslims want to be MUSLIM more than they want western concepts like democracy, equality before the law, etc. It struck me when listening to the interview that Orthodoxy is for people who really want to be CHRISTIAN, i.e., who want all the stuff I just said most people don’t want (fasting, prayer, abstinence, cross-bearing, etc). The trouble is that many people who are technically Orthodox or Catholic or whatever don’t actually want to be Christian. They want to have the label of “Christian” while essentially living however they want. This is true in the USA, and in traditionally Catholic countries (NB: the rise of Protestantism in places like Mexico), and in traditionally Orthodox ones, too.
I will say (sorry that this is going on so long, but I think this is an important point) that one of the things that attracted me to the Coptic Orthodox Church during my period of discernment is the fact that its holy men and women of the desert often rejected the idea that there can or even should be such a thing as a “Christian society” (cf. some of the sayings of Amma Syncletica), hence making discussions like this somewhat speculative and secondary to the actual work of being Christian. I like that. In fact, the whole monastic idea was in its own way an alternative to society, as the Copts had lived through brutal repression under the likes of Diocletian, and contended with Berber marauders (such as those who killed St. Moses the Ethiopian at his monastery, with several of his monks), and then found themselves on the outs with the Byzantines in the wake of Chalcedon, and then facing an erosion of their community and more restriction and oppression when the Arab Muslims showed up…really, we/they never had a moment’s peace, on the political level. But in all that or through all that, the faith grew and grew. It really tells me something about where their priorities are, and where I’d like my priorities to be, too. I don’t think dropping out of society is the answer (nor that this is what monks do), but I think looking for a “Christian society” is just asking for more and more disappointment, if not out and out hostility. I would rather Christianity be embraced by my community than by their political leaders. One will lead to salvation (“our life and our death is with our brother” – St. Anthony, the Father of the Monks), the other to the kind of mess we’re in now. As the psalmist tells us: Put not your trust in princes, in whom there is no salvation.
Exactly what period of history are you speaking of? I suspect you are talking of the communist era? Were ALL Eastern Orthodox settled in communist lands for you to so easily claim that Eastern Orthodoxy was COMPLETELY threatened so that it’s survival is some sort of unique miracle? Tt’s a miracle, of course, but no less of a miracle than the survival of the Ukrainian Catholic Church. In fact, I think the survivial of the Ukranian Catholic Church, and all the Catholic Churches in Eastern Europe under communist regimes is more impressive (given that their overt persecution lasted much longer).
. You’re right, in that, missionaries are a different matter. But, in some respects, infusion (coerced, or not) is seen as encroaching on their ethnic/cultural identity, because of how such an effort was administered (goes back to the monarchy argument you made)