Posted by Leo
on 11/13/2008, 6:43 pm
Message modified by user Leo 11/13/2008, 6:49 pm
I just thought of another way to talk about Church As Immigrant Ministry or vice-versa, a possibly-relevant analogy: If I as a non-Orthodox walked into, say, a prison ministry Liturgy and coffee hour (if the warden let me, of course!!), that's certainly "valid" Church, but I might not feel the same way as in a non-prison parish, since I'm not (currently) a prison inmate, and never have been. No matter how nice everybody is, I'd feel out of place. And the same way, when I as an Irish/Native American walk into my Greek parish and they talk about "us Greeks" and "our Greek heritage" - substitute any other ethnic adjective, even "Russian"* - then sure, I don't feel included, but hey, the parish is set up to serve a particular population, Hellenic Diaspora. They're allowed to do that, and should do that. But should they claim that they're THE Church in the Western world or America or Valley Forge or Astoria or Coal Country, when they do that? Shouldn't "THE Church" be an all-purpose, territorial, pan-ethnic parish or diocese or jurisdiction or patriarchate ... that HAS Immigrant/Diaspora Ministries, prison ministry, youth/YA ministries, singles ministries, evangelization here and abroad, etc.?
Theologically, Immigrant/Diaspora Ministry-parishes, etc., may qualify as Church, but philosophically or morally they may have further to go toward being more fully The Church. I guess the distinction I'm thinking of is between a specialized ministry vs. a generalized Church. Theoretically in fact our Diaspora parishes / jurisdictions belong to generalized patriarchates ... but the rule of Generalization they mostly abide by in their homelands, they don't here.
The Church is not a ministry (pace our Low-Church Protestant friends); the Church HAS ministries. Diaspora/Immigration congregations, chapels, chaplaincies, are a ministry. Who are the "generalist" parishes / territories here? The OCA Alaska Diocese; any jurisdiction's pan-ethnic or evangelizing parishes/missions; perhaps even monoethnic parishes that are accessible to and positively welcoming of other ethnicities and conscious of them and inclusive of them.
Not that someone who really believes Orthodoxy should let the Church's linguistic or cultural barriers keep them from salvation if that's all that's available to them where they are. But should we impose such barriers? If we really want to bring The Orthodox Church (back) to the West, don't all of us need to establish and support the above kinds of generalized parishes / institutions, invest in them?
Sincerely,
Leo
(*--When in an OCA parish the priest starts his sermon with "Slava Izusu Christu," I happen to have figured out it means "Glory to Jesus Christ" ... but I don't know the response in Slavonic, "Glory forever," when everybody else does, and they don't say it clearly enough for me to pick up on, when they respond en masse to him -- and yes, I keep forgetting to ask! Be that as it may, as of 3 years ago it was said that only 60 pct. of their parishes worship mostly or entirely in the vernacular, which surprised me.)
Responses:
