EO, ISLAM, & ECUMENISM

(103) ORTHODOXY AND ISLAM – MAJOR CONCERNS FOR ORTHODOX ENGAGEMENT

This paper will focus on the historic, ecclesiastic, and academic rapprochements between Orthodox Christianity and Islam from the 8^th century until today. I will present a diachronic overview of the dialogue, controversies, and polemics between the two religious worlds, organized along three main axes: 1) by sketching the historical context and the theological terms with which the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) world met and tried to interpret and classify Islam; 2) by outlining the ambivalent relations between subjugate Orthodoxy and victorious Islam during the long Ottoman period, which lasted for many centuries, even up to the beginning of the 20th century, in South-East Europe; and 3) by discussing the agenda of an academic and ecclesiastic dialogue which hopes to foster mutual understanding with the Muslim world. I will employ historical, theological, as well as societal approaches to the issue, utilizing the European—and particularly the Greek—bibliography.

Byzantium and Islam

The Orthodox Church’s encounter with Islam begins with the latter’s infancy in the East. Communication and dialogue with Islam, therefore, have always been vital to the Orthodox Church. Orthodox and Muslims have lived together in the East for fifteen centuries now. Great Fathers of the Church, such as John of Damascus (+749), On Heresies (De Haeresibus, PG 94, 764A-773A) and Conversation Between a Saracen and a Christian (Disputatio Saraceni e Christiani, PG 94, 1585-1596V and 96, 1336V-1348V) and Theodore Abû Qurra (+825), Against the Heresies of the Jews and the Saracens (Contra Haereticos, Judaeos et Saracenos, Varia Opuscula, PG 97, 1461A-1601B), were the first to engage with Islam and wrote dialogues—fabricated, of course—which demonstrate familiarity with Muslim teachings as they attempt to overturn them using Christian teachings.¹

Shortly thereafter, the Byzantine Empire experienced a long period of controversy and polemic against Islamic literature, which, despite its acridity, created the conditions for knowledge of the Islamic world. Thus, the second phase of the Orthodox Church’s and Byzantine Empire’s engagement with Islam began around the middle of the 9^th century and lasted until the end of the 14^th century. The epicenter of this anti-Islamic literature was thenceforth Constantinople, the seat of the Byzantine Empire, and not, as in the previous phase, Damascus, the great Hellenistic center of learning and the arts, which became the first capital of the Islamic Caliphate of the Umayyads (661-750). During this period, many polemical texts against Islam were written in Greek, which were later edited and translated into Latin by J.P. Migne, the most significant of which were: Bishop Samonas of Gaza, Conversation with Ahmed the Saracen (Disputatio cum Achmed Saraceno PG 120, 821-832), Euthymius Zigabenus, Dogmatic Armor (Panoplia Dogmatica, § 28, PG 130, 1332D-1360D), Nicetas Choniates, Treasure of Orthodoxy (Thesaurus Orthodoxae Fidei, § 20, PG 140, 105A-121C), Bartholomeus of Edessa, Refutation of the Hagarene (Elenchus et Confutatio Agareni, PG 104, 1384A-1448), et al. Of particular importance is the work of Nicetas of Byzantium, Refutation of the Book Forged by Muhammad the Arab (Confutatio falsi libri quem scripsit Mohamedes Arabs, PG 105, 669A-805D). The text is, of course, polemical; Nicetas, however, undertakes a serious analysis and review of a large part of the Qur’an. This represented, at the end of the 9th century, the first attempt by Christians to translate the Qur’an into Greek, while the first Latin translation did not appear until 1141, by order of Peter Venerabilis, abbot of the Benedictine abbey of Cluny, under the title The Religion of Muhammad the Pseudo-prophet (Lex Mahumet pseudoprophete).²

The third stage of engagement with Islam began in the middle of the 14th century and ended with the overthrow of the Byzantine Empire in 1453. This phase is the most important because it was a period during which an attempt was made to better understand Islam and to effectively communicate and dialogue with it. That is why the works written during this period are distinguished for their moderate tone and—relatively speaking—objectivity. The most important figures during this period, who promoted communication between the two religious traditions, were the emperors Ioannis VI Cantacuzenus (1292-1383), Four Apologies Against the Muslim Sect (Contra Sectam Mahometicam Apologiae IV, PG 154, 372A -584A and Contra Mahometem Orationes Quatuor, PG 154, 584B-692C), and Manuel II Paleologus (1348-1425), Dialogues Held With A Certain Persian, the Worthy Mouterizes, in Ankara of Galatia, as well as the great theologians of the late Byzantine era, Gregory Palamas (1296-1359), Letter to His Own Church in Thessaloniki, b) Letter to Anonymous “When Conquered”, c) Discourse with the Atheist Chionas, 3 and the monk Joseph Vryenius (1350-1432).⁴

Orthodoxy and Islam during the Ottoman Period

Immediately after the fall of Constantinople on May 29, 1453, the enslaved Christians of the former Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire turned their hopes to God and hoped for divine intervention. During this period of the Ottoman Empire (15^th-19^th C.), a remarkable literature developed in the Greek language about Islam, with varied content: at first, an attempt at convergence and Greek-Turkish rapprochement and cooperation, followed by polemics against the Ottoman Empire and islam, and finally an apocalyptic literature, which comforted the Christians, prevented their Islamization, and looked forward to the end of Islam. A period of silence and endurance then began for the Christians of the former Christian empire. Of course, they were intimately familiar with Islam, but only in terms of subservience, under the domination of the Ottoman Empire, and according to the special status of Islamic subjugation (dhimma = protection). Nevertheless, there were always voices of reason and reconciliation, and from the very first years of the Ottoman Empire, to develop a dialogue and promote mutual understanding with Ottoman Islam. The pioneers of this new Christian attitude towards Islam were the very influential Patriarch George Scholarios (Gennadios II),⁵ and the diplomat George Amiroutzes.⁶ Their great difference from George of Trebizond, who also had a conciliatory demeanour towards Islam, was that after the fall of Constantinople they continued to live in the ‘Dār al-Islam’, the territory of the Ottoman Empire, and did not flee to the West.

The dire situation in which the Christianity of the former Eastern Roman Empire found itself was far from simple; Christians themselves were initially divided on how to react to this subjugation to the Ottoman Muslims, or the Mahometans, Agarins, Saracens, or Ismaelis, as they are referred to in the Byzantine sources. Some looked to the West for help, while others were firmly opposed to anything western or papal. One unfortunate consequence was the flight of Greek scholars to the West, which meant, on the one hand, the intellectual bankruptcy of the enslaved people, and, on the other, the intellectual enrichment of the West and the Western academia. Some of the church leaders, and the few intellectuals who remained after the conquest of Constantinople and the major centers of the East, accused the ruling class of scholars of abandoning their country, leaving it in darkness and ignorance, and securing for themselves a safe haven in the West. However, those scholars who sought refuge in Europe helped cultivate literature and the European Renaissance, and acted as ambassadors for the Greeks and the Christians of the East, often imploring the rulers of Europe to organize crusades against the Ottoman Empire in order to liberate the Christians from Islam. Scholars played a particularly important role in the conflict between the Islamic and Christian worlds during the 15^th and 16^th century. Figures such as Plethon Gemistos from Mystra, Manuel Chrysoloras, Cardinal John Bessarion, Janus Lascaris, Michael and Marcus Moussouros, Michael Apostolis, as well as Gazis and Kallistos Chalkokondilis were dedicated to ancient Greek beauty and conveying its light to the West. Being gripped by a spirit of unity between the two Churches, they fought against Ottoman rule and Islam, imploring the West for help. Many of them—in fact, the most eminent among them—believed that the growing Ottoman expansionism could be curtailed by sending the Christian forces of the West to aid the Christian populations in Greece and the Balkan Peninsula.

Of the many expatriate scholars from the period of Ottoman rule, who taught Greek in the West and became ambassadors to European countries for their enslaved compatriots, there are few who dealt specifically with Islam or the relations between Christians and Muslims in the Ottoman Empire. One of the first, just decades after the Fall of Constantinople, was George of Trebizond (1396-1484), who was born in Heraklion, Crete, although he descended from Trebizond. He studied in Italy and taught Greek in Venice, Rome, and Naples.

He also served as a librarian in the Vatican Library. He wrote many works, the most notable for our purposes here being On the Truth of the Christian Faith, which attempted to bridge the differences between Christians and Muslims and create a climate of Greek-Turkish understanding.7 He viewed Mehmed’s rule as the historical continuation of the Roman Empire and thus understood that the sultan was called to restore the unity of the people in “one body,” recreating the pax romana.⁸

Another very interesting form that developed during the period of Ottoman rule was that of apocalyptic and eschatological literature, which interpreted the reasons for Islam’s ascension, foretold the end of Muslim power, and proclaimed the ultimate triumph of Christianity. The literature consists of legends, oracles, and prophecies, which speak about the revival of the Greek Christian empire, and includes interpretations of the Revelation of John, which had far-reaching political and social implications. This was the most popular form of literature during the Ottoman period, being directed against Islam and seeking to preserve the faith of the people and to nourish utopian discourse and hope for future salvation.⁹

The various oracles and prophecies spread not only among Greek Christians, but also to many Christian peoples in Europe and especially Russia. Thus was created the legend of a liberating “blond race.” Originally, the “blond race” was thought to be the Franks and the Latins in general. But beginning in the early 16^th century, the “blond race” became identified with the Russians. This was no doubt inspired by the marriage of Sophia-Zoe Palaiologina, niece of Constantine Palaiologus, to Ivan III (the Great). This symbolized that Russia was the heir and successor of the Byzantine Empire. As early as 1492, Metropolitan Zosimus of Moscow named Ivan III “the new Tsar Constantine of the new Constantinople—Moscow.” The enslaved Greeks could not, of course, foresee the subsequent political and ecclesiastical implications of this theory, and pinned their hopes for liberation on this “blond race,” without, however, abandoning the original idea of turning to the great powers of Europe. Later, when both proved fruitless, they realized the value of relying on their own forces.¹⁰

The literary genre of apocalyptic and eschatological literature that Id during the Ottoman Empire was predominantly apologetic and polemic, turning openly against Islam. Many such apocalyptic works were written between 1453 and 1825. The main body of work began with the translation The Revelation of John the Theologian and Evangelist into Vernacular Greek by Maximos the Peloponnesian around 1600, and continued with an assortment of interpretations of the Revelation of John, the most characteristic being those by George Koressios (1645), Gordios (1717), Pantazes from Larissa (1767) and Cyril Lavriotis (1825).¹¹

This hermeneutical and eschatological literature was not only religious, but also had political and social ramifications. It sought: a) to comfort and encourage the Orthodox Christian world during its slavery to Muslims, b) to provide the necessary moral, spiritual, and theological means by which the Church and its people could become grounded in the Orthodox faith and meet the challenges of Islam (which is why these were also apologetic texts aimed against Islam), c) to tackle, religiously, the vaunted problem of theodicy and explain, with various rationalizations, the meaning of the subjugation of the Orthodox Christians to the power of Islam, d) to define, according to the biblical conception of history, the age in which humanity was living, i.e., whether it was living in the eschatological age which leads to the end of the world, or the age leading to the triumph of Christ and his “thousand-year reign,” which, according to the dominant view of the time, would precede the world’s end, e) to describe, in light of the eschatological images contained in the book of Revelation, the Antichrist, who is identified with Islam and the person of Muhammad, and to determine when the reign of the Antichrist started and when it would end, and finally f) to reinvigorate Christians’ minds, endurance, and hope for future freedom.

The combination of this kind of history with theology, and the human need to interpret history and the future of humankind through predictions and prophecies from the past, is well known throughout the Christian world, and over time crept into the Islamic world as well, giving rise to numerous myths, beliefs, and expectations.¹² The humans of every era dress their fears and concerns with eschatological images and await, under these symbols, a better future. In times of war and adverse social situations, they interpret the images as eschatological prophecies that foretell the punishment of believers for their apostasy, as well as their future redemption.

Orthodoxy and Islam in Modern and Postmodern Times

The aforementioned are some of the key aspects of the life of Greek Orthodox Christians during the period of Ottoman Empire, and their struggle for the survival of their religion, languages, and traditions. With the gradual decline of the Ottoman Empire, much of the Orthodox world of the Balkan Peninsula achieved independence, both politically and religiously, while another part of the Christianity of the East remained largely under Islamic control. Interest in Islam gradually developed among the Orthodox peoples of South-Eastern Europe. Among Greek historians and scholars, particular interest in Islam first developed at the end of the 19^th and beginning of the 20^th century, especially regarding Greek-Turkish relations, primarily those during the period of Ottoman rule and the Byzantine period. An independent field of Islamic Studies, an objective and impartial inquiry into the principles of Islam, began after 1960 in the Theological Schools in both Thessaloniki and Athens. In the Department of Theology at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki in particular, scholars investigated virtually all aspects of Islam, including early Islamic times and the spread of Islam, the relationship with biblical teaching, the various schools of muslim theology (Kalam) and Islamic law (Shari’ah), Islamic mysticism, the transmission of Greek literature and Aristotelian philosophy from the 8^th AD century onwards to the Islamic world, as well as the newer and modern reformist trends and the various manifestations of political Islam.¹³ The contemporary religious studies approach to Is^lam focuses more on specific aspects of Islam, such as Shi‘a Islam, the early sectarian movements, such as the Alides, Kharijites, Ibadites, etc., Islamic Messianism and its political ramifications, and the Byzantine and post-Byzantine polemical and apologetic literature against Islam.¹⁴

The Ecumenical Patriarchate and Inter-Religious Overtures and Dialogues

The Orthodox Churches of the East thus carry out a substantial and necessary dialogue with Islam based on current academic research and their experience of living with Islam. Specifically, the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and the ancient Patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem all live and converse with both the Muslim world of the East, as well as with other Christian Churches and Judaism. For the Orthodox, the basis of modern dialogue is both the conciliar encyclicals of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, those of 1902 and 1904, in which then-Patriarch Joachim III invited the metropolitans and bishops of the territory of the Ecumenical Throne to intensify their efforts at dialogue and interdenominational communication, and to work toward the closer unity of the Orthodox Churches. Those encyclical letters are some of the key texts in the history of the ecumenical movement. The Ecumenical Patriarchate’s initiatives are crucial not only for the unity of the Christian churches but the whole world. The aforementioned patriarchal documents, as well as the encyclical of 1920, express the “Mother Church’s” anguish for the breakdown amongst the churches and throughout the world.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate’s first major overtures to other religions were the First Pan-Orthodox Conference in Rhodes, 1961, and the First Pre-Conciliar Pan-Orthodox Conference held at the Orthodox Center of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Chambésy in 1976, in which the Church clearly decided to work toward interreligious understanding and cooperation through the elimination of fanaticism on all sides, reconciliation among peoples, and the promotion of the ideals of freedom and peace in the world, all in the service of contemporary humankind, irrespective of race or religion.

Today this dialogue is championed by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which regards it as essential. Following firmly in the footsteps of its past, the Patriarchate offers itself and its centuries of knowledge in matters of coexistence to open a new and modern dialogue with the religions of the world, and especially with the two other Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Islam.

The dialogue with Judaism began in 1976 and was followed, in 1986, by the dialogue with Islam. The late Metropolitan Damaskinos of Switzerland (and later Adrianople), in describing his experience of interreligious dialogue with Judaism and Islam, noted that the Orthodox Center of the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s initiatives in organizing academic meetings with both Judaism and Islam reflect the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s broader disposition toward Orthodoxy’s positive contribution to the peaceful coexistence of the faithful of the three religions who live in the same geographical area and face common challenges.¹⁵

Orthodoxy and Judaism

The academic series of meetings between Orthodoxy and Judaism has focused on the biblical tradition and the sources of the two religions as a common commitment to defend peace and justice in the world. The Ecumenical Patriarchate—through its representatives, both priests and academics—has engaged in dialogue on these issues with the International Jewish Committee, the Jewish community of Romania, the World Jewish Council of Jerusalem and the International Jewish Committee for Interreligious Consultations in New York. Metropolitan Emmanuel of France, who is in charge of interreligious dialogue and the Office of the Ecumenical Patriarchate at the E.U., has characterized the meetings as a waypoint in the continuation of the dialogue between the two religious traditions and in the understanding of the common values not only in the past but also in the modern reality of the multiple ideological, spiritual, and social confusions and divisions of the world. “The Spiritual and Physical Environment: Respecting Our World, Respecting One Another,” marked the eighth such conference between Christian Orthodoxy and Judaism in the city of Thessaloniki in June 2013.

Orthodoxy and Islam

A prominent place has been occupied by the dialogue between Christians and Muslims, which has been promoted by the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Theological Schools in Greece. Under the aegis of the Ecumenical Patriarchate since their inception in 1986, these meetings were led by the late Metropolitan Damaskinos of Switzerland until 1998. Damaskinos was the heart and soul of the interreligious dialogue with Islam, supported primarily by Prince Hassan of Jordan. For many years, the two worked together toward mutual understanding and peaceful coexistence between Muslims and Christians. The Muslim world of the Middle East, in any event, has always felt a close proximity and historical affinity with Orthodoxy. The Ecumenical Patriarchate’s interreligious initiatives continue today under the leadership of Metropolitan Emmanuel of France. There were eleven meetings between 1986-2008, which covered a wide variety of issues: authority and religion in the traditions of the two religions; models of historical coexistence between Muslims and Christians and shared humanistic ideals; the concept of peace in the traditions of the two monotheistic religions; the problem of religious pluralism and its limits in Islam and Christianity; young people and the value of moderation; the importance of education for understanding and cooperation between the two religious traditions; the educational system in Islam and Christianity; the prospects for cooperation between Christians and Muslims in the third millennium; the role of Muslims and Christians in modern society; the image of the Other and the meaning of equality before the law; the role of religion in peaceful coexistence in modern society; and, finally, the ability to build up interreligious dialogue to ensure joint training opportunities for young religious leaders, priests, imams, theologians, and students of the respective Muslim and Orthodox Christian communities. Such initiatives encourage the participation of intellectuals and young religious leaders in dialogues and therefore in the process of mutual interreligious understanding and rapprochement between religious and cultural communities, facilitating dialogues and interreligious partnerships and allowing participants to act locally as well as ecumenically, contributing thus to mutual understanding and the advancement of reconciliation.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate also organizes or participates in conferences at local, regional, and global conferences related to religious, humanitarian, social, and ecological issues.¹⁶

The Department of Theology of Aristotle University of Thessaloniki and the Dialogues with Islam

In order to facilitate a better understanding of the ancient, historical, spiritual, and academic links between Greek and Arab-Islamic thinking, and thus between the Eastern Christians and Islamic traditions, the Society for Greek-Arabic Studies was founded in June 1980 in Thessaloniki. It publishes the journal Graeco-Arabica, and has organized a series of international conferences to advance the study of the Greek-Arabic sources and to promote research and communication between the Greek and Arab-Islamic world.

The Orthodoxy and Islam movement began in 1990, which seeks to bring together the Greek Orthodox and Iranian Shi‘I worlds. This was extremely significant, since it represented the first time, since the Islamic revolution of 1979, that the Islamic Republic of Iran made an overture toward the “West,” choosing—it should be noted—Greece and Orthodoxy. This movement organized four remarkable and productive academic conferences, of which the first two and the fourth were hosted in Athens (1990, 1992, and 1997), and the third in Tehran (1994).

The Department of Theology of the Theological Faculty of Thessaloniki has also hosted numerous occasional workshops and lectures related to the interreligious dialogue and relations between Christians and Muslims. In this framework, a workshop was organized in September 1993 on Islamic Studies in Greece and Islam’s Place in Greek Public School Textbooks, which was attended by professors from the University of Cologne, professors of the Theological Faculty of Thessaloniki, and teachers of religion in the secondary school system of Northern Greece and Thessaly. The proceedings of the conference were published a few years later.¹⁷

On May 15, 1995, Thessaloniki hosted Islam in Greece: Meeting with the Evangelical Church of Germany’s Representatives for Islam (KEK), in which members of the evangelical delegation were guided by professors from the Faculty of Theology of Aristotle University to what was then the Special Pedagogical Academy of Thessaloniki for the education of Muslims, as well as the Theological School. This was then followed by a tour of the Islamic foundations and a meeting with representatives of the Muslim community of Thrace.¹⁸

In November 2009, the Section on Biblical Literature and Religious Studies of Thessaloniki’s Department of Theology organized a major international conference on Ibadism, Ibadi Studies, and the Sultanate of Oman, which was headlined by the most respected professors in the Western world for research on the Middle East and Islam, as well as by prominent Muslim academics. Interdisciplinary relations with the Sultanate of Oman have continued with a bilateral academic agreement between the Department of Theology of Aristotle University, led by the present author, and the Institute for Islamic Law in the Sultanate of Oman (http://ibadhism-conference. Web.auth.gr/). Within this framework, the academic head for the Sultanate of Oman, Dr. Abdulrahman al-Salimi, delivered a lecture at the Department of Theology on 29 March 2012, entitled, “Christians and Muslims and the Issue of the Middle East.”

University professors have also participated in conferences pertaining to interreligious dialogue, and the Department of Theology of the Theological Faculty of Aristotle University of Thessaloniki is particularly well known for its interest in interreligious dialogue, including it in a related course, which is divided into two sections a) mission and ecumenical dialogue, and b) interreligious dialogue. The Department of Theology has been the pioneer in promoting knowledge of—as well as communication and dialogue with—Islam within the Greek educational and theological milieu since the 1970s.¹⁹

In the Theological Faculty of Athens, interreligious dialogue was promoted by Anastasios Yannoulatos, Professor of Religious Studies and now Archbishop of the Orthodox Church of Albania. His rich life and work has sprung not so much from the Theological Faculty itself as from his missionary work in Africa (with the blessing of the Patriarchate of Alexandria), his multifaceted involvement in the inter-Orthodox, inter-Christian, and interreligious dialogues of the World Council of Churches (WCC), and his monumental work in Albania, where, in exceedingly difficult historical times, he helped resurrect the local Church, which now plays a leading role in fostering a peaceful coexistence between Christians and Muslims. His work there is complemented by his enormous academic contributions and publications, which cover important aspects of the interreligious dialogue.

The Challenges and Difficulties of the Interreligious Dialogues

A basic prerequisite for conducting a peaceful and constructive dialogue with the religious ‘other” is good will. The primary goal of interreligious dialogue is the understanding of this “other,” based on the conviction that, through their diversity, people, religions, and universal values can come together on a common point, which is, first and foremost, respect for the human person and creation. And while the interreligious dialogue from the 1970s through the 1990s was primarily theoretical and academic, concerning the sources and principles of each religion—in order to better understand the beliefs and the person of the religious “other”—, there was a turn at the dawn of the new millennium toward more practical and pressing issues. The dialogue is now more focused on cultivating friendly and peaceful relations between peoples and nations, and overcoming misunderstandings and religious conflicts.

The raison d’être of the interreligious dialogue is thus first and foremost the peaceful coexistence of religious communities, which are called to live together in the same space. Lack of dialogue can lead to tensions and conflicts between different religious groups, and religion itself can facilitate war as well as peace. The contemporary interreligious dialogue is most concerned with social and economic issues, as well as immigration, global poverty, and—by extension—human suffering and the increase of fundamentalism, which is a danger to religions themselves. Therefore, the most appropriate lens through which to view these vital issues is not the dogmatic one—relying on our preconceived notions of the religious convictions of the “other” and our fear of losing our own doctrines, a stance which can lead to war between religions or proselytizing—but primarily the social and humanitarian one. It is a dialogue of religious cultures, an effort to meet and work together in service of universal values that lead to harmony between cultures in the name of humanism, which is founded on the conciliatory values of the religious traditions. In this way, representatives of the world religions and academic teachers cannot be confined within insulated “theological” boundaries, but are open to the religious concerns of others, willing to listen to their views, and reconcile with them. To this end, it is essential to change the curricula to include the teaching of interreligious dialogue, in order to mitigate religious misunderstandings and conflicts, and to promote proper understanding of the religious other. This leads to the inevitable question about the relationship between this new positive approach to the religious “other” and the current missionary methods and programs.

The question today for the Orthodox and more generally for all Christians Is how they will manage to respond to the new historical reality, and the challenges of the times, and especially that of today’s multi-religious environment. How will they go about discovering new theological avenues of mutual understanding and coexistence with the “other,” the non-Christian? The Christian faith is called to converse with the great religions of the world and to take into account the following factors: a) that cultural and religious diversity is a social good, b) that participation in interreligious dialogue is, according to Christ’s teachings, one of the Church’s obligations to humankind, and c) that the path of interreligious dialogue leads closer to the mutual understanding and harmonious coexistence of peoples and is a step toward the spread of “peace on earth,” in accordance with the Gospel maxim.²⁰

It is possible, in this sense, for systematic theology to make a contribution to interreligious dialogue. A theology of religions, from an Orthodox perspective, would help Orthodox faithful and Churches to approach and reflect upon the people of other religions. Christians, on the basis of Scripture and the life of the Church, must come to see God’s grace and providence abounding throughout the world, the whole of divine creation. This is the meaning of the mystery of the Divine Economy in Christ. The salvific work of Jesus Christ is for all humankind. And this is the sense of the ecumenicity or universality of the Church, which subsumes within it every particularity and locality, the one and the many, indivisibly. Its “special” grace is its “universal” grace. The breath of God is one and blows everywhere: “in Him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28 RSV). It is in this sense that we can understand the presence of Christ in the universal church and the history of the world, and thus we can experience the grace of God, which spreads across the world. If the grace of God is confined to the narrow boundaries of a single organization, a church bound within the world, the work of the Divine Economy and salvation in Christ would lose its universality.

In a recent workshop on interreligious dialogue entitled “Mission and Modern Religions,” which took place at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, in cooperation with the Department of Theology of Holy Cross in Boston, USA (11 May 2012), Fr. Emmanuel Clapsis emphasized that God’s love for humanity would not permit the delimitation of his saving grace to the narrow framework of the Orthodox Church. Fr. Clapsis presented a brief overview of the literature on the Orthodox understanding of other religions. He referred to systematic and biblical theologians (Karmiris, Agourides, Khodr) as well as experts on religious studies (Yannoulatos, Ziakas). In fact, he noted that, according to Karmiris, “the limits of salvation are independent of the Church.” Fr. Clapsis then noted the “particularity of Religions,” a concept which has been emphasized in recent research, observing at the same time that an overemphasis on “particularity” can lead to a loss of religions’ global dimensions. The question is then how people’s particular faith can be open to world affairs and not remain closed in on itself. Professor Stelios Tsompanidis, who teaches ecumenical theology in the Department of Theology, recalled the words of the late Kostis Moskov concerning the “encounter of the great Word.” The challenge therefore today for the Orthodox world is to emphasize that the catholicity of the Church is found in the Local Church (the concept of conciliarity, which is characteristic of Orthodoxy). When, however, the Church closes in on itself and restricts itself to the local, the catholic and universal automatically ceases to exist. The challenge for Orthodoxy, then, is to open itself to its catholicity and to dialog with other religions in a spirit of love in Christ.

Christians are called to join together in understanding God’s work in the world and his will, which allows each of us to live according to our traditions. Law or force cannot achieve such progress. It requires rather changes in disposition, education, and mutuality, in the sense of forming relationships with mutual respect, aid and—primarily—love.