Incarnate Love

Vigen Guroian

Description

Incarnate Love is a major contribution to both Orthodox ethics and to Christian self-understanding. Completely revised with a new preface and two additional chapters, this work aims to articulate a social ethic that can make sense of the Orthodox experience in the United States, as well as challenge the Orthodox tradition to formulate a new strategy for church and societal interaction.

Sujets

• Philosophie
• Éthique et morale
• Comparative Religion
• PHILOSOPHY
• Philosophie et théologie
• Theology
• Spirituality
• Christianity
• Religion
• History

Informations

• Publié par: University of Notre Dame Press
• Date de parution: 31 octobre 2020
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9780268082543
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

: & : & VIGEN gUROIAN

Incarnate Love

I ncarnate L ove

Essays in Orthodox Ethics

— Second Edition —

V I G E N G U RO I A N

University of Notre Dame Press Notre Dame, Indiana

Copyright © 2002 by University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, Indiana 46556 All Rights Reserved www.undpress.nd.edu

Published in the United States of America

First edition 1987 This ebook has been made possible in part by a major grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities: Exploring the human endeavor. Any views, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this book do not necessarily represent those of the National Endowment for the Humanities.

The author and publisher are grateful for permission to reprint the following, some retitled or in revised form:

“Notes Toward an Eastern Orthodox Ethic,”Journal of Religious Ethics9, no. 2 (Fall 1981): 228–44; “Love in Orthodox Ethics: Trinitarian and Christological Reflec-tions,”Cross Currents33, no. 2 (Summer 1983): 181–97; “Seeing Worship as Ethics: An Orthodox Perspective,”Journal of Religious Ethics13, no. 2 (Fall 1985): 332–59; “The Problem of an Orthodox Social Ethic: Diaspora Reflections,”Journal of Ecu-menical Studies21, no. 4 (Fall 1984): 709–29; “The Americanization of Orthodoxy: Crisis and Challenge,”Greek Orthodox Theological Review29, no. 3 (Winter 1984): 255–67; “Liturgy and the Lost Eschatological Vision of Christian Ethics,”Annualof the Society of Christian Ethics20 (2000): 227–38; “The Gift of the Holy Spirit: Reflections on Baptism and Growth in Holiness,”Studies in Christian Ethics12, no. 1 (1999): 23–34.

A record of the Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available upon request from the Library of Congress.

∞The paper in this book meets the guidelines for permanence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library Resources.

To June, Rafael, and Victoria

Contents

Preface to the Second Edition Acknowledgments

Introduction

PART I: THEANTHROPIC ETHICS 1. The Shape of Orthodox Ethics 2. Love in Orthodox Ethics: Trinitarian and Christological Reflections

PART II: LITURGICAL ETHICS 3. Liturgy and the Lost Eschatological Vision of Christian Ethics 4. The Gift of the Holy Spirit: Reflections on Baptism and Growth in Holiness 5. Seeing Worship as Ethics 6. An Ethic of Marriage and Family

ix xvii

1

13

28

49

62 75 102

viii

Contents

PART III: SOCIAL ETHICS 7. The Problem of a Social Ethic: Diaspora Reflections 8. Orthodoxy and the American Order: Symphonia,Civil Religion, or What? 9. The Americanization of Orthodoxy: Crisis and Challenge

Notes Index

141

163 189

203 233

Preface to the Second Edition

Incarnate Lovewas my first book. Fifteen years have passed since I last attended to it as an ongoing theological endeavor. It was published in the fall of 1987 when I was coming on my fortieth birthday and just establishing a niche for myself as an Orthodox theologian writing Christian ethics in America. At that time only Fr. Stanley Harakas was doing such work in a deliberate manner. In the chapters on “An Ethic of Marriage and Family” and “Orthodoxy and the American Order” I challenged Fr. Harakas on several matters, even as I set about plant- ing my own seeds in the fresh ground he alone was breaking. I thought his discussion of marriage was not centered sufficiently in liturgy or adequately described marriage as an ecclesial vocation. I also criti- cized his recommendations for Orthodox social ethics in America, stating that his constructive proposals were overly attached to the old Constantinianism and a Justinian notion of the unity (orsymphonia) of church and state. Reviewers noticed these criticisms and imagined a major divide between the two of us. I do not think our differences were ever quite as great as was thought by reviewers. Our differences certainly did not weaken our friendship or my reliance upon Fr. Harakas as an intellectual and spiritual mentor. Over the intervening years we have worked closely with one another within the academy and in our churches. I also think the differences in our views on social ethics are less pronounced. We both are deeply concerned over the dramatic shift in America toward an overt and aggressively anti-Christian secularism. We may continue to differ over strategies, but we are both convinced that above all else the Orthodox Church needs to show a better way of life than that of the popular culture. John Chrysostom’s advice in a homily on 1 Corinthians speaks to our present circumstances: “Let this, I say, be our way of overpowering them, and of conducting our

ix