kueng christianity pp 257 273

Slide1: 

II. The Ecumenical Hellenistic Paradigm of Christian Antiquity 11. The Third Rome: Moscow C History Pages 257-273 A hatred of Rome spread from Byzantium into Russia. Latin order of Teutonic Knights battled with Orthodox principalities. There were invasions of the Catholic Poles. Moscow: the second phase of Russian history From 1240 to 1447 Russia was under the role of the Mongol Tartars, Batu (grandson of Genghis Khan) destroyed Volga Bulgars. IN 1240 Kiev fell. (Caliph of Baghdad fell in 1258.) For two centuries Russian was under rule of Tatars. The Orthodox Church kept alive the awareness of the national unity of Russia. The church continued to develop spiritual and theological traditions; Stephan, Bishop of Perm was the most significant missionary of the Russian church among the East-Finnish Syrjans. Why didn’t Russian turn to the West (through connections of Novgorod and Hanseatic cities)? Alexander Nevsky (1252-1263) Grand Prince of Novgorod preferred pagan rule of the Tatars and feared Rome would force “schismatic” Russia under its authority. Alexander inflicted defeats on Swedes, the order of Teutonic Knights, and Lithuanians and secured the demarcation of Orthodox Russia from the Western world. Kiev had not recovered from the Tatar onslaught and focal point shifted to Moscow in the 14th century. Church leadership moved from Kiev to Moscow. St. Sergei of Radonezh (1314-1392) founded the Monastery of the Trinity which was the model for other monasteries that would engage farmers. He contributed to the victory of Russians over the Tatars at the battle of Schnepfenfeld (shattered Tatar rule and raised prestige of Moscow). Beneath the Byzantine Christian culture an underground “second culture” of old Slavonic paganism had persisted. In addition, the two centuries of Tatar enslavement led to a “Tatarism” – lack of principle and prostration before the strong and oppression of the weak Petersburg: the third phase of Russian history Peter the Great prescribed a revolution. Russian Christianity was confronted with a new post-Reformation, modern paradigm (PV). The Petersburg phase brought a secularization and rationalization of the Russian state. The church was reorganized; state absolutism of modernity was established. The new stronghold of Orthodoxy Fifteenth century Moscow was the center of Russian art stamped by Italian architects in church building. Byzantine forms and norms were adapted. Moscow as soon to free itself from the domination of Constantinople. In the Council of Ferrara in Florence (1438-9) Byzantium accepted a (short-lived) union with Rome which in Russia was seen as a betrayal of Orthodoxy. The separation from Byzantium did not become a schism. In 1453 the Russian church made efforts to normalize relationships, but now regarded itself as an “autocephalous church” (claimed its own head). But paid a high price: subjection of church to state. This explains why after the fall of Constantinople, Moscow had an interest in taking over the leadership of Eastern Orthodoxy. Grand Duke Ivan III (1462-1505) married Zoe (Sophia), niece of the last Roman emperor. Ivan formally entered into the heritage of Constantinople in 1472. For Ivan, the title “Czar (=Emperor, Caesar) of all Russia was important and was confirmed by the Patriarch of Constantinople. Moscow was soon able to secure the recognition of its independence from Constantinople, In 1589 the Russian Metropolitan Job was appointed “Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia” by Patriarch Jeremias II of Constantinople who made a special journey for the purpose. But Moscow did not achieve a change in the hierarch of patriarchates. It did not become the third patriarchate (after Rome and Constantinople), but remains the last of the six patriarchates. From the beginning the Metropolitan of Moscow and All Russia was under the direct control of the Grand Princes and Czars. Ivan IV the Terrible removed Philip (Metro. of Moscow) and had him murdered. The church was now part of the state. Even through Russia – no paradigm shift The Roman political tradition was not taken over in Russia. Russia was never part of the Roman-Byzantine empire. Greek language and education were not introduced in Russia. Russia took over only Byzantine Christian religion without Greek-Hellenistic civilization. Russia’s Orthodox Christian faith was taken over from Byzantium. There were certain changes in detail, but on the whole dogma, liturgy, theology, discipline and piety continued to have a Byzantine stamp. A continuity between Byzantium and Moscow was evident: same Orthodox tradition, same theology of the seven ecumenical councils, same world of monks and icons. On the way from Byzantium to Russia, Christianity did not undergo any paradigm shift. Rather, Russia took over the Hellenistic Byzantine paradigm (PII). From the beginning the Orthodox paradigm has a markedly traditionalistic and monastic character. Why no Reformation in Orthodox? Except in Russia, the Orthodox church had come under the rule of an alien religion. Can one church (Protestant) communicate reformation to another church if it has little understanding of the different paradigms? Protestant dialogue partners on themes of scripture, tradition, free will, and grace made it clear they were arguing from a different paradigm (PIV). The church had no criterion for a critical examination. Everything Russian was regarded as Orthodox and everything foreign as heretical. The Bible did not play any normative role for an innovative theology. The special role of the Ukraine The Orthodox outside the Moscow empire formed an independent hierarchy. There was no rigid traditionalism nor xenophobia. The Ukrainian Petro Mohyla, Metropolitan of Kiev, worked for reform of the church. After his death, Muscovite conquest of the western territories began.