Ethnophyletism hypocrisy

[prodromos]

It is only a generation or so ago that you had the Polish Catholics building their church, and no more than a block away the Irish Catholics built their church, and there was no interaction at all between them.

I have to admit some frustration with the attitude of Greeks generally, although I personally have never experienced the negative aspects which have been mentioned thus far, but I think it is important that we remember how it was primarily through the Church that Greek language, culture and identity survived the 4 centuries under Ottoman rule, so for Greek Orthodox, being Orthodox is almost synonymous with being Greek. It is very hard for them to separate the two.

 

[Not David]

It is only a generation or so ago that you had the Polish Catholics building their church, and no more than a block away the Irish Catholics built their church, and there was no interaction at all between them.

I have to admit some frustration with the attitude of Greeks generally, although I personally have never experienced the negative aspects which have been mentioned thus far, but I think it is important that we remember how it was primarily through the Church that Greek language, culture and identity survived the 4 centuries under Ottoman rule, so for Greek Orthodox, being Orthodox is almost synonymous with being Greek. It is very hard for them to separate the two.

Greeks have treated me well when I was in Greek Churches. I just find hypocritical that Greeks started up with the whole "ethnophyletism criticism" when they have had some culture privilege in the history of the Church.

Don't get me wrong, I love Greek culture (even more than my native culture)

 

[ArmyMatt]

Not so much of a theological imperative, in my case... But when I was considering becoming Orthodox.. I asked 5 different people I know, of Greek ancestry, about joining the Greek Orthodox Church... All 5 (from 4 different congregations, in 2 different diocese), told me that if I wasn't Greek, or marrying into a Greek family, I'd be better off trying the OCA, or the Antiochians.. And in two of those cases, adding "....instead of The.. GREEK....Church"

yeesh, glad I never had that

 

[dzheremi]

If I'm not mistaken (which I very well could be, seeing as how it's not my church, but this is how I remember it being described in the EO sources I've consulted), the event that lead to ethnophyletism being formally condemned was when the Bulgarians in Constantinople (?) attempted to set up a hierarchy for ethnic Bulgarians only, with an ethnically Bulgarian bishop and so forth. This in effect places the ethnicity of the people above the shared faith, as there is not really any other justification to not just go to the already-existing Greek church at that location. They apparently just wanted a bishop from among "their people" and/or didn't want to listen to a Greek, which is a very prideful attitude. If I recall correctly, Fr. Andrew Damick in his "Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy" podcast lectures on AFR referred to ethnophyletism as "the ethnic check at the door -- 'you are not one of us? Get out.'" Clearly that kind of thing is unacceptable.

This is different than the mere existence of a Bulgarian parish, or a Greek parish, or a Syrian parish, etc. To simply be of whatever background you are or the parish is seems fine, but if on the other hand they said "St. Nicholas' Serbian ONLY Orthodox Church" or something, you should probably go somewhere else. That isn't healthy.

 

[Euodius]

Yeah, seen a good a bit of it in the Greek Church. A Greek friend of mine even told me about growing up being told that only the Greeks are orthodox and all others are less orthodox. He was forbidden to marry non-Greek orthodox, because "they aren't really orthodox."

 

[dzheremi]

How poisonous. Lord have mercy.

 

[E.C.]

In America, I think, ethnic expression can be good or bad. As long as ethnicity does not malign Orthodox Christian faith & welcoming new followers, it is good.

Not so much of a theological imperative, in my case... But when I was considering becoming Orthodox.. I asked 5 different people I know, of Greek ancestry, about joining the Greek Orthodox Church... All 5 (from 4 different congregations, in 2 different diocese), told me that if I wasn't Greek, or marrying into a Greek family, I'd be better off trying the OCA, or the Antiochians.. And in two of those cases, adding "....instead of The.. GREEK....Church"

That sounds like about 95% of the Greeks I've ran across. When I was stationed in Virginia there was a Greek parish not even ten minutes down the road from the barracks. I went there for a few months, but ended up leaving because despite being Orthodox since 2016 I was never truly welcomed there. I never received parish emails even after giving them my email address at least four times, the yia-yias scowled at me like I was an invader, and the only ones to talk to me during coffee hour was the one Serb gentleman and his American wife. That parish's founding priest (a Navy Chaplain in life) would be spinning in his grave fast enough to solve any energy crisis if he could see how that parish treats none Greeks.

After that I started going to the Antiochian parish where I was welcomed with open arms and even helped them with some of the renovation work. They threw a party when I transferred.

If I'm not mistaken (which I very well could be, seeing as how it's not my church, but this is how I remember it being described in the EO sources I've consulted), the event that lead to ethnophyletism being formally condemned was when the Bulgarians in Constantinople (?) attempted to set up a hierarchy for ethnic Bulgarians only, with an ethnically Bulgarian bishop and so forth. This in effect places the ethnicity of the people above the shared faith, as there is not really any other justification to not just go to the already-existing Greek church at that location. They apparently just wanted a bishop from among "their people" and/or didn't want to listen to a Greek, which is a very prideful attitude. If I recall correctly, Fr. Andrew Damick in his "Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy" podcast lectures on AFR referred to ethnophyletism as "the ethnic check at the door -- 'you are not one of us? Get out.'" Clearly that kind of thing is unacceptable.

That's basically what ethnophlytism is. A lot of times there's also putting one's tribe above the Church.

Yeah, seen a good a bit of it in the Greek Church. A Greek friend of mine even told me about growing up being told that only the Greeks are orthodox and all others are less orthodox. He was forbidden to marry non-Greek orthodox, because "they aren't really orthodox."

Just like the Italians and Catholicism. Or Arabs and Islam. The Russians have their moments, but not as bad as the Greeks.
I rarely go to Greek parishes for this reason. The only Greek parish I've ever been to that didn't fit this stereotype was in Spokane, WA. The parish uses more Slavonic and English than they do Greek because their members are mostly Ukrainians and converts. Maybe 20% are ethnically Greek and even fewer actually speak it. When the Ukrainians started showing up after the Cold War ended, the priest went out of his way to learn some Slavonic to incorporate it into the Liturgy so they would feel more "at home".

 

[“Paisios”]

That sounds like about 95% of the Greeks I've ran across. When I was stationed in Virginia there was a Greek parish not even ten minutes down the road from the barracks. I went there for a few months, but ended up leaving because despite being Orthodox since 2016 I was never truly welcomed there. I never received parish emails even after giving them my email address at least four times, the yia-yias scowled at me like I was an invader, and the only ones to talk to me during coffee hour was the one Serb gentleman and his American wife. That parish's founding priest (a Navy Chaplain in life) would be spinning in his grave fast enough to solve any energy crisis if he could see how that parish treats none Greeks.

After that I started going to the Antiochian parish where I was welcomed with open arms and even helped them with some of the renovation work. They threw a party when I transferred.


That's basically what ethnophlytism is. A lot of times there's also putting one's tribe above the Church.


Just like the Italians and Catholicism. Or Arabs and Islam. The Russians have their moments, but not as bad as the Greeks.
I rarely go to Greek parishes for this reason. The only Greek parish I've ever been to that didn't fit this stereotype was in Spokane, WA. The parish uses more Slavonic and English than they do Greek because their members are mostly Ukrainians and converts. Maybe 20% are ethnically Greek and even fewer actually speak it. When the Ukrainians started showing up after the Cold War ended, the priest went out of his way to learn some Slavonic to incorporate it into the Liturgy so they would feel more "at home".

This saddens me. I joined a Greek parish, the only Orthodox Church near me. While the first question asked of me was “Are you Greek?”, I have felt welcomed here, and some of those who have been most welcoming to me have been the yia-yias . I wish all parishes would be like this.

 

[LizaMarie]

While I have yet to visit it, the closest Orthodox Church to me is a Greek Orthodox Church. I'm thinking they don't have this problem, thankfully, as I have looked at their website and they have a video of their church and various members. The priest was saying in the video that many ethnicities are represented in the church, including Northern European Scandinavian(which used to be the main ethnic group in this area) Greek,(who founded the Church), Hispanic, Middle Eastern, Ethiopian, etc. The video makes the church look very welcoming!

 

[Euodius]

That sounds like about 95% of the Greeks I've ran across. When I was stationed in Virginia there was a Greek parish not even ten minutes down the road from the barracks. I went there for a few months, but ended up leaving because despite being Orthodox since 2016 I was never truly welcomed there. I never received parish emails even after giving them my email address at least four times, the yia-yias scowled at me like I was an invader, and the only ones to talk to me during coffee hour was the one Serb gentleman and his American wife. That parish's founding priest (a Navy Chaplain in life) would be spinning in his grave fast enough to solve any energy crisis if he could see how that parish treats none Greeks.

I believe that might be the same Greek Church I was talking about... I think I even know that Serbian gentleman.

 

[buzuxi02]

Yet I have doubts about the claim of ethnophyletism as a heresy when the Orthodox Church in Eastern Europe is separated based on Nationality: Serbs, Russians, Romanians, etc.

If it is supposedly a heresy, then most of Orthodox Christians are heretics.

I actually agree with you. Phyletism is usually a sin not a heresy. Notice I say "usually" as my own people the Greeks have crossed the line teaching their race has a special privelege in deciding matters of Orthodox ecclesiology (now that's heresy). I wont get into the fiasco of that 1872 council which from what I understand is not exactly pan-orthodox as the bulgarian church still rejects it.

Personally I view all Churches in the diaspora as embassy churches so that completely eliminates any worry about being heretical phyletists or any violation of canons on overlapping bishops, etc.

 

[buzuxi02]

so for Greek Orthodox, being Orthodox is almost synonymous with being Greek. It is very hard for them to separate the two.

This is true and not a bad thing, it's how it should be. We should not be some sort of neo-nestorians dividing up our lives into a secular life and a private religious life as if we are constituted as two seperate hypostasis.
Granted the newer secularized generation have been brainwashed to discard it all and just say they are the ancient greeks.

I just find hypocritical that Greeks started up with the whole "ethnophyletism criticism" when they have had some culture privilege in the history of the Church.

Very hypocritical. In fact the decree of 1872 "sounds good" but in reality the Greeks never expect to hold themselves to that standard. Greeks were basically saying to the Bulgarians, we are the privleged ones we alone should dominate the hierarchy and you non-Greeks are being racists for wanting a hierarchy exclusively of your own kin like we have!

 

[buzuxi02]

was when the Bulgarians in Constantinople (?) attempted to set up a hierarchy for ethnic Bulgarians only, with an ethnically Bulgarian bishop and so forth. This in effect places the ethnicity of the people above the shared faith, as there is not really any other justification to not just go to the already-existing Greek church at that location. They apparently just wanted a bishop from among "their people" and/or didn't want to listen to a Greek, which is a very prideful attitude. If I recall correctly, Fr. Andrew Damick in his "Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy" pod

While that is the gist of the argument as to why phyletism was condemned, as usual the devil is in the details. The Bulgarians were ticked that it was impossible for them to get Bulgarian bishops elected to Constantinople. It's not much different than having the Jerusalem Patriarchate hold a council condemning the Arab-rum for phyletism because the native palestinians are complaining they want more arab representation or their own heirarchy in the all greek, all the time dominated Patriarchate.

 

[All4Christ]

This is true and not a bad thing, it's how it should be. We should not be some sort of neo-nestorians dividing up our lives into a secular life and a private religious life as if we are constituted as two seperate hypostasis.

You say this is not a bad thing? Where does that leave Orthodox Christians from a non-Orthodox country? To be an American Orthodox Christian is not synonymous with being American. To be an Australian Orthodox Christian is not synonymous with being Australian. To be a British Orthodox Christian is not synonymous with being British (the list could go on).

We can live our public life as Orthodox Christians and not consider being a [jurisidiction] Orthodox to synonymous with being [insert country / ethnicity here].

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you? You say that ethnophyletism is a sin, but these statements seem to imply a direction towards ethnic separation and segregation of the Church - especially when saying to be a convert in the Greek Orthodox Church is essentially becoming Greek (to me, that is the consequence of considering the statement “to be Greek Orthodox is almost synonymous as being Greek” to be true). We are not of this world and are citizens of Heaven above. That should be our ultimate loyalty and affiliation.

 

[buzuxi02]

I'm saying is there was no separation of church and state during the formation of their identity. Holidays and customs are intertwined. You would never place a Thanksgiving in the midst of Lent nor would you seperate your politics or life into a secular category and into a religious one. In the west today this is impossible as there is a dichotomy in ones civil and religious life by design

 

[Not David]

I'm saying is there was no separation of church and state during the formation of their identity. Holidays and customs are intertwined. You would never place a Thanksgiving in the midst of Lent nor would you seperate your politics or life into a secular category and into a religious one. In the west today this is impossible as there is a dichotomy in ones civil and religious life by design

Can't one try to avoid that separation in our lives?

 

[E.C.]

While that is the gist of the argument as to why phyletism was condemned, as usual the devil is in the details. The Bulgarians were ticked that it was impossible for them to get Bulgarian bishops elected to Constantinople. It's not much different than having the Jerusalem Patriarchate hold a council condemning the Arab-rum for phyletism because the native palestinians are complaining they want more arab representation or their own heirarchy in the all greek, all the time dominated Patriarchate.

And the Palestinians make a good point. In their whole synod there's only one ethnic Palestinian. The rest are all Greeks.

In fact, wasn't this what the whole Melkite Schism was about?

 

[buzuxi02]

In fact, wasn't this what the whole Melkite Schism was about

No, both the Melkites and Syriac befriended Latin monks sent their by Rome for that very purpose. These latins as were able to send them abroad to be educated. They also published free of charge new liturgical books for them and other support as the indigenous were simply poor. In other words they were bought off.
What your thinking of is when an Arab heirarchy was restored like 200 years later. In 1724 the remaining Orthodox and its heirarchy was gutted from the defections. So a bunch traveled to Constantinople to get new bishops. I believe a greek Athonite was appointed and the Patriarchate from then on was a Greek from abroad. After 150 or so years they got sick and tired of them and wanted their own indigenous bishop.
The truth is in both cases (originally appointing a Greek and then giving him the boot centuries later) worked out for the best as most returned during that period, the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate is larger and more numerous than the Melkites.

 

[buzuxi02]

And the Palestinians make a good point. In their whole synod there's only one ethnic Palestinian. The rest are all Greeks.

That's the problem when you get into the nitty gritty of the 1872 council. The Bulgarians had a legitimate gripe.