This session includes four papers spanning different time periods, cultures, and methodologies to explore new understandings within Orthodoxy. From hermeneutical reframings, to phenomenological interpretations, and theological insights to cultural heritage, this panel provides space for diverse topics to be brought into conversation around understandings of Orthodoxy and the types of thinking that can be applied to gain new insights around topics within Orthodox Christianity.
In this paper I will evaluate the reception of Mosaic Law (hereafter just Law) by Origen of Alexandria (c. 185 – c. 254 C.E.). Within in the polemics against “Christian heretics” and Judaism, Origen ascribed an important place to the Law preferring allegorical interpretation to the “heretical” and “Judaizing” approaches to the law, which included both rejection and literal interpretation. Origen of Alexandria treated the Mosaic law on the one hand as relatively lower in value to Christian message while at the same time defending its divine origin and limited but continuing relevance. While a chronological evolution is apparent in Origen’s thought, I argue that there is a great deal of continuity in Origen’s view of the Law between the Alexandrian and Caesarean period.
St. Maximus the Confessor states that "the mystery of the Incarnation of the Logos is the key to all the arcane symbolism and typology in the Scriptures." This project explores to what extent Maximian Logos/Logoi theology aids an inclusivist interpretation of the Book of Job within the Judeo-Christian Traditions. Joban scholarship is typically siloed to discussions of theodicy; however, the Scriptural account of a pagan saint is prophetic in content and provides a pedagogy for the religious 'other'. Applied theological structures include Maximian Christology and Mystagogy which is aided by Pope Gregory the Great's threefold spiritual hermeneutic in Moralia in Job. The exploration concludes that Christology and Job provide theological grounds for an inclusivist interpretation of salvation and hopes for further explorations in Patristic writings on Job.
This paper contends that Orientalism and right-wing Slavophilia are based in the same colonial epistemology aimed to disentangle, legitimize, and hierarchize the sociopolitical categories of “East” and “West.” With this as a backdrop, I will propose a reading of Florovsky’s neo-patristic synthesis as a postmodern and postcolonial response to both, attempting to reconstruct a foundation for self-actualized Orthodox Christian identity neither in subjugation nor in contrast to Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. I will explore how this differs from a Slavophilic reading of neo-patristic synthesis, which I call “neo-patristic reactionism,” focusing on method and historiography. Lastly, I will discuss its implications for contemporary Orthodox ecclesiology and ecumenical relations, including an appraisal of its flaws and limitations.
As objects of devotion and veneration, icons invite the beholder to an encounter with the one depicted. But the presence an icon promises is grounded on a metaphysics of presence and absence, which, refuses stability or mastery and ultimately entails an essential difference between the icon and whom it depicts. In this paper I explore how phenomenology illuminates this encounter with the icon’s metaphysics of presence and absence. Drawing on Jean-Louis Chretien’s analysis of prayer, which explores the experience of presence and absence in prayer as both wounding and blessing, I argue that the traditional metaphysical accounts of the icon are amplified by consideration of how presence and absence is an experiential reality revealed in the prayerful encounter of the one depicted, an encounter that carries with it the possibility of wounds that bless.