Books by Brandon Gallaher
The only comprehensive critical anthology of theological and historical aspects related to Florov... more The only comprehensive critical anthology of theological and historical aspects related to Florovsky's thought by an international group of leading academics and church personalities. It is the only book in English translation of Florovsky's key study in French-"The Body of the Living Christ: An Orthodox Interpretation of the Church". The contributors tackle a broad range of subjects that comprise the theological legacy of one of the most influential theologians of the 20th century. The essays examine the life and work of Florovsky, his theology and theological methodology, as well as ecclesiology and ecumenism. A must-have volume for those who study Florovsky and his legacy. Companion volume to The Patristic Witness of Georges Florovsky, the Reader of his key works (https://www.amazon.com/Patristic-Witness-Georges-Florovsky-Theological/dp/0567697711/ref=pd_sbs_1/136-4412741-2610617?pd_rd_w=9HnR6&pf_rd_p=823f75d3-b996-4a9c-b5f9-0ccf7e5a48d7&pf_rd_r=ZBVR04GJ3SBK05PSWBET&pd_rd_r=6984aaeb-970c-46a4-8e81-c938e3bda255&pd_rd_wg=Tehos&pd_rd_i=0567697711&psc=1)
Purchase: https://www.amazon.com/Living-Christ-Theological-Georges-Florovsky/dp/0567701859/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1631537768&sr=8-4
Table of Contents: https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/living-christ-9780567701855/
Preface: His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I
Foreword: John Zizioulas (Metropolitan of Pergamon, Ecumenical Patriarchate)
Introduction: John Chryssavgis and Brandon Gallaher.
PART I GEORGES FLOROVSKY: LIFE AND WORK
1.The Theological Legacy of Archpriest Georges Florovsky
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew
2.The Diachronic Significance of Fr. Georges Florovsky's Theological Contribution
Metropolitan John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon
3.Three Witnesses: Bulgakov, Florovsky, Lossky*
Metropolitan Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia
4.Georges Florovsky and the Sophiological Controversy*
Alexis Klimoff
5.Georges Florovsky and Sergius Bulgakov: "In Peace Let Us Love One Another”
Paul Ladouceur
6.Father Georges Florovsky and Archimandrite Sophrony Sakharov: A Theological Encounter
Nikolai Sakharov
7.The Newly Published Correspondence between Fr. Georges Florovsky and Fr. Alexander Schmemann: Reflections on Leadership
Paul L. Gavrilyuk
8.A “Theology of Facts”: Christ in the Theological Thought of Fr. Georges Florovsky and Fr. John Meyendorff
Joost van Rossum
PART II NEOPATRISTIC SYNTHESIS: THEOLOGY AND METHODOLOGY
9.“Waiting for the Barbarians”: Identity and Polemicism in the Neopatristic Synthesis of Georges Florovsky*
Brandon Gallaher
10.Neopatristic Synthesis and Ecumenism: Toward the “Reintegration” of Christian Tradition*
Matthew Baker (+2015)
11.The Ecclesial Hellenism of Fr. Georges Florovsky*
Christos Yannaras
12.The Emergence of the Neopatristic Synthesis: Content, Challenges, Limits*
Marcus Plested
13.Christian Hellenism in the Neopatristic Synthesis of Archpriest Georges Florovsky
Metropolitan Chrysostomos (Savvatos) of Messinia
14.Apophaticism, Cataphaticism, Mystical Theology and the Christian Hellenism of Fr. Georges Florovsky*
Pantelis Kalaitzidis
15.Florovsky's “Predicament of the Christian Historian” and the Orthodox Church's Predicament with History Today
Vassa Larin
16.From Synthesis to Symphony
John Behr
PART III THEOLOGY AND ECCLESIOLOGY:HISTORY AND MISSION
17.Beginning with Christ: the Key to Anthropology in the Dogmatic Work of Florovsky
Alexis Torrance
18.Creatio ex nihilo and creatio ex amore: Florovsky, Bulgakov, and Zizioulas in Dialogue on Theological Methodology
Nikolaos Asproulis
19.Ecclesiology in Relation to History: Church and World in the Christian Vision of Fr. Georges Florovsky
Will Cohen
20.Overcoming Florovsky's Opposition of the Charismatic to the Canonical in “On the Limits of the Church”*
Alexander Rentel
21.Fr. Georges Florovsky and Mission: Witness “To,” “With,” or “Beyond” “Sacred Hellenism”?
Athanasios N. Papathanasiou
22.The Timeliness of the Patristic Thought, and the Contribution of Fr. Georges Florovsky to Contemporary Theological Dialogue
Metropolitan Gennadios (Limouris) of Sassima
23.Georges Florovsky and the World Council of Churches
Archbishop Job (Getcha) of Telmessos
24.Fr Georges Florovsky's Understanding of the New Mission in the West
Ivana Noble
PART IV THE BODY OF THE LIVING CHRIST: AN ORTHODOX INTERPRETATION OF THE CHURCH
25.Introduction to Georges Florovsky's The Body of the Living Christ: An Orthodox Interpretation of the Church
Robert M. Arida
26.The Body of the Living Christ: An Orthodox Interpretation of the Church331
Georges Florovsky
Bibliography
Index
The Patristic Witness of Georges Florovsky: Essential Theological Writings, 2019
Georges Florovsky (1893-1979) was one of the most prominent Orthodox theologians and ecumenists o... more Georges Florovsky (1893-1979) was one of the most prominent Orthodox theologians and ecumenists of the twentieth century. His call for a return to patristic writings as a source of modern theological reflection had a powerful impact not only on Orthodox theology in the second half of the twentieth century, but on Christian theology in general. Florovsky was also a major Orthodox voice in the ecumenical movement for four decades and he is one of the founders of the World Council of Churches. This book is a collection of major theological writings by George Florovsky. It includes representative and widely influential but now largely inaccessible texts, many newly translated for this book, divided into four thematic sections: Creation, Incarnation and Redemption, The Nature of Theology, Ecclesiology and Ecumenism, and Scripture, Worship and Eschatology. A foreword by Metropolitan Kallistos Ware presents the theological vision of Georges Florovsky and discusses the continuing relevance of his work both for Orthodox theology and for modern theology in general. The introduction by the Editors provides a theological and historical overview of Florovsky theology in teh context of his biography. The book includes explanatory notes, translation of patrisitc citations and an index. Georges Florovsky was a major 20th-century theologian, historian, ecumenist and patristic scholar.
Table of Contents
Preface xi
Editorial Introduction xv
Introduction 1
Part 1 Creation, Incarnation and Redemption 31
1 Creation and Createdness 33
2 Preface to In Ligno Crucis 65
3 In Ligno Crucis : Th e Church Fathers’ Doctrine of Redemption 71
4 Th e Lamb of God 81
5 The Ever-Virgin Mother of God 95
6 The Stumbling-Block 107
Part 2 The Nature of Theology 113
7 Revelation, Philosophy and Theology 115
8 Western Influences in Russian Theology 1 29
9 Patristics and Modern Theology 153
10 Breaks and Links 159
11 The Legacy and the Task of Orthodox Theology 185
12 The Predicament of the Christian Historian 193
13 Saint Gregory Palamas and the Tradition of the Fathers 221
14 The Christian Hellenism 233
15 ‘On the Authority of the Fathers’ 237
16 ‘Theological Will’ 241
Part 3 Ecclesiology and Ecumenism 245
17 The Limits of the Church 247
18 Sobornost: Th e Catholicity of the Church 257
19 The Body of the Living Christ 273
20 Confessional Loyalty in the Ecumenical Movement 279x
21 The Ethos of the Orthodox Church 289
22 The Ecumenical Dialogue 303
Part 4 Scripture, Worship and Eschatology 309
23 Eschatology in the Patristic Age 311
24 Starets Silouan 325
25 Scripture and Tradition 329
26 The Worshipping Church 335
Epilogue: ‘Let Us Choose Life’ 347
Index 353
Freedom and Necessity in Modern Trinitarian Theology examines the tension between God and the wor... more Freedom and Necessity in Modern Trinitarian Theology examines the tension between God and the world through a constructive reading of the Trinitarian theologies and Christologies of Sergii Bulgakov (1871-1944), Karl Barth (1886-1968), and Hans Urs von Balthasar (1905-1988). It focuses on what is called 'the problematic of divine freedom and necessity' and the response of the writers. 'Problematic' refers to God being simultaneously radically free and utterly bound to creation. God did not need to create and redeem the world in Christ. It is a contingent free gift. Yet, on the other side of a dialectic, he also has eternally determined himself to be God as Jesus Christ. He must create and redeem the world to be God as he has so determined. In this way the world is given a certain 'free necessity' by him because if there were no world then there would be no Christ. A spectrum of different concepts of freedom and necessity and a theological ideal of a balance between the same are outlined and then used to illumine the writers and to articulate a constructive response to the problematic. Brandon Gallaher shows that the classical Christian understanding of God having a non-necessary relationship to the world and divine freedom being a sheer assertion of God's will must be completely rethought. Gallaher proposes a Trinitarian, Christocentric, and cruciform vision of divine freedom. God is free as eternally self-giving, self-emptying and self-receiving love. The work concludes with a contemporary theology of divine freedom founded on divine election.
The delay of the Parousia—the second coming of Christ—has vexed Christians since the final decade... more The delay of the Parousia—the second coming of Christ—has vexed Christians since the final decades of the first century. This volume offers a critical, constructive, and interdisciplinary solution to that dilemma. The argument is grounded in Christian tradition while remaining fully engaged with the critical insights and methodological approaches of twenty-first-century scholars. The authors argue that the deferral of Christ’s prophesied return follows logically from the conditional nature of ancient predictive prophecy: Jesus has not come again because God’s people have not yet responded sufficiently to Christ’s call for holy and godly action. God, in patient mercy, remains committed to cooperating with humans to bring about the consummation of history with Jesus’ return.
Collaboratively written by an interdisciplinary and ecumenical team of scholars, the argument draws on expertise in biblical studies, systematics, and historical theology to fuse critical biblical exegesis with a powerful theological paradigm that generates an apophatic and constructive Christian eschatology. The authors, however, have done more than tackle a daunting theological problem: as the group traverses issues from higher criticism through doctrine and into liturgy and ethics, they present an innovative approach for how to do Christian theology in the twenty-first-century academy.
Reviews of My Books by Brandon Gallaher
Theology, 2022
The 24 papers in this collection derive from a 2019 conference in Istanbul organized by the Ecume... more The 24 papers in this collection derive from a 2019 conference in Istanbul organized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate to celebrate the legacy of the Russian Orthodox theologian Georges Florovsky (1893-1979). His influence on Orthodox theology since the Second World War, especially within the emigr e community expelled from Soviet Russia, clearly was and remains immense. He inspired theologians such as the Greek John Zizioulas (who spent several years teaching at Edinburgh and then Glasgow universities) and the English Kallistos Ware (teaching at Oxford for many years) to have a passionate reverence for Patristic theology; in turn, he strongly influenced such Anglican theologians as Eric Mascall, Michael Ramsey and Derwas Chitty, as well as the otherwise Barthian Presbyterian Thomas Torrance. On the cover Rowan Williams commends 'this excellent collection of studies' as bearing 'eloquent witness to the growing interest in his thinking'. However, like many collections of conference papers, there is a considerable amount of repetition from one contributor to the next. With some papers also veering towards hagiography, the two editors have done well to bring out some of the negative sides of Florovsky-detailing, for example, the way he quarrelled with his colleagues wherever he went in Europe or the USA and his animated theological battles, chiefly with his senior colleague Sergei Bulgakov (1871-1944) and, more elliptically, with the spiritual philosopher Nikolai Berdyaev (1874-1948), but also with his contemporary Vladimir Lossky (1903-58) and his junior colleague Alexander Schmemann (1921-83). He remains famous for his extensive ecumenical activities, from the foundation of the World Council of Churches onwards. Yet, his stated aim in doing so appears less than ecumenical, with him writing in 1949: 'The Orthodox Church is specifically called to take part in the ecumenical exchange of ideas precisely because she knows herself as the guardian of the apostolic faith, of the Tradition in its integrity and fullness, and to be in this sense the only true Church' (pp. 393-4). This substantial and thought-provoking collection concludes with a fresh translation of his short 1948 work The Body of the Living Christ.
Third and finally, can one construct a theological anthropology while bracketing eschatology? Thi... more Third and finally, can one construct a theological anthropology while bracketing eschatology? This relates to the doctrine of creation discussed in answer to the first question. Radner intentionally postpones eschatology in his work on human mortality (p. 6), whereas Sigurdson, in Heavenly Bodies, of course embraces it. Ironically, however, it is Radner who ultimately aids a more bodily conception of the resurrection. Though Sigurdson affirms both continuity and discontinuity between mortal and resurrected bodies, he finally opts for Greshake's idea of 'resurrection in death'. It is not 'the revival of a dead body', 'a third act after birth and death', but the completion of one's embodied relationship to God in being joined to Christ (p. 572). I, for one, am unconvinced: the New Testament, after all, speaks expressly of resurrection ek nekr on, not en nekrois, and it is hard to see how one's body decomposing in the ground while one's 'relationality' lives on is a resurrection out from among the dead; it is, at best, an intermediary state. Whereas eschatology only appears at the edges of Radner's book (pp. 15, 39-40, 158), the hints given appear more fruitful for conceiving the resurrection of the body as such.
Central to the problematic explicated in this meticulous monograph by Brandon Gallaher is the mys... more Central to the problematic explicated in this meticulous monograph by Brandon Gallaher is the mystery of how God has somehow always been "freely captivated" by creation due to his eternal desire to be in union with us through Christ. Gallaher endeavors to constructively and critically discuss how Sergei Bulgakov, Karl Barth, and Hans Urs von Balthasar each share this common problematic in their theology. Gallaher wants to provide a "key"to the Triune God's "reasonableness" with respect to freedom and necessity, taking us further and deeper down the "path of the question."
Reports by Brandon Gallaher
Orthodox Christianity, Sexual Diversity & Public Policy: Final Report of the University of Exeter & Fordham University Bridging Voices Consortium, British Council Bridging Voices Exeter-Fordham Report, 2020
Executive Summary
• This project investigated issues of sexual diversity within the Eastern Orth... more Executive Summary
• This project investigated issues of sexual diversity within the Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition. These present some of the most complex and contentious questions facing the Orthodox Church today and and public debate over them is often polarised.
• Responses of the Orthodox Church to questions of sexual diversity must be contextualised within the church’s distinctive theological tradition, history, and contemporary geopolitical setting, noting especially the prevalence of anti-Western sentiments today.
• The attitude of most Orthodox Christians towards issues of sexual diversity may be characterised as “conservative” in comparison with prevailing attitudes in the secular West. Despite wide consensus, there is diversity in pastoral practice and thought.
• Theologians can find it difficult to agree on the reasoning and sources that under-gird received teachings and practices. For some, questions of sexual diversity are settled as first principles of Orthodoxy, whereas for others they are secondary and contextual.
• This project demonstrated that polarisation of discourse on controversial religious issues can be overcome through the careful construction of spaces for dialogue. This relies, above all, on a willingness of organisers not to foreclose difficult conversations.
• Civil society actors can advance the work of this project through educating them-selves and others, co-operation with religious actors, enabling more deep conversations, using our project resources, promoting our project’s work, and patronising further research.
https://www.fordham.edu/download/downloads/id/14755/Exeter_Fordham_BV_Final_Report.pdf
https://www.fordham.edu/orthodoxy/bridgingvoices
Eastern Orthodoxy and Sexual Diversity: Perspectives on Challenges from the Modern West, British Council Bridging Voices Exeter-Fordham Interim Report, 2019
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• The Eastern Orthodox Church (EOC) is one of the largest Christian bodies in ... more EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• The Eastern Orthodox Church (EOC) is one of the largest Christian bodies in the world today. It is a family of independent churches which regard themselves collectively and individually as the “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.” The EOC is neither Protestant nor Catholic; it is also distinct from the Oriental Orthodox churches (e.g. Armenian, Ethiopian, and Coptic churches). Its approximately 200 million members are today mostly found in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, but there is a large and influential “diaspora” located mainly in Western Europe, North America, and Australia. The primus inter pares of Orthodox bishops is the Ecumenical Patriarch.
• Today, the EOC remains committed to models of gender and sexuality and related disciplines which were formulated in pre-modernity. Many Orthodox subscribe to a version of “gender essentialism” which regards biological sex, gender, and gender roles, as stable, transhistorical realities, such that all human beings are essentially and permanently either male or female. The Church’s disciplines include, among other things, an understanding of marriage as the union of a male and a female and only sexual activity within its bounds is morally sanctioned. Other gender identities and sexualities, whether publicly acknowledged and actualized or not, are officially condemned, but pastoral responses vary, especially according to country and culture.
• Most Orthodox (especially those in post-Soviet Eastern Europe) accept the Church’s teachings and disciplines on sexuality as part of a complete package of received traditions which is beyond scrutiny. These teachings and disciplines are widely believed to derive from a universal and univocal Orthodox discourse on gender and sexuality that is clearly and unquestionably manifest in the Church’s tradition (which includes the Bible). It is popularly believed that the truth of current Orthodox teachings, disciplines, structures, and practices can be “proven” by demonstrating their historical continuity within the Church as an institution. In many cases, attitudes to sexual diversity correspond to a generally socially-conservative attitude.
• Many of the same Orthodox (in Eastern Europe, but also some Western converts) regard the Church’s opposition to sexual diversity not only as a de facto reality but as a matter of dogmatic truth, which must be defended in the contemporary world against the decadent secularism of “the West” and its rejection of “traditional values.” Defenders of current practice often regards the Church as being under attack. The small number of Orthodox who do speak or act publicly against the Church’s current teachings often face exclusion from Church life and in some cases they are subjected to defamation of character, harassment, and threats (and acts) of violence. In many traditionally Orthodox countries, rejection by the Church is sometimes accompanied by rejection by family, friends, and the wider community, according to wider social norms.
• A minority of Orthodox today publicly challenge the Church’s teachings and disciplines concerning sexual diversity, and more hold contrary opinions in private. The status quo is often questioned, in the first instance, as a result of pressing pastoral realities on the ground. Some accommodation of sexual diversity already occurs in the shadows and without open acknowledgment, particularly outside Eastern Europe. A very small number of communities both practice open hospitality towards LGBTQ+ persons and many more pastors practice functional inclusion while maintaining the official positions of the Church when pressed to do so. In some larger cities, “LGBTQ+ friendly” parishes exist with the knowledge of the bishop and his blessing for the priest to extend as much pastoral and sacramental care as possible.
• The 2017 Pew report on Orthodox Christianity in the 21st Century shows that a majority of Orthodox in the USA and Greece say society should be more accepting of homosexuality, and a majority in the USA (which has civil same-sex marriage) are in favour of allowing gay couples to marry. At least one local Orthodox Church in Western Europe permits the celebration of a service of celebration for same-sex couples in civil marriages and integrates gay couples into many of its communities. There is a noteworthy difference of opinion on many topics between post-Soviet and non-Soviet countries.
• Among Orthodox theologians, there is a wide range of opinion on the received teachings and a growing recognition that these realities need to be grappled with openly. A small but growing number advocate for the open inclusion of LGBTQ+ people in Church life and same-sex marriage. Intellectual challenges are often expressed in terms of the historical contingency of theorizations of gender and sex (and especially shifts between pre-modernity and modernity) and the absence or inconsistency of theological reasoning in this area.
https://www.fordham.edu/download/downloads/id/14010/BV_Report.pdf
https://www.fordham.edu/orthodoxy/bridgingvoices
Articles in Journals by Brandon Gallaher
Journal of Eastern Christian Studies, 2025
The article proposes a new sophiological reading of the human rights tradition which attempts to ... more The article proposes a new sophiological reading of the human rights tradition which attempts to understand how the theology of Holy Wisdom might transform what we understand about the broad theological discourse on human rights by grounding those rights within not only theological anthropology but Trinitarian theology. After touching briefly on a few examples of more negative Orthodox Christian viewpoints on human rights (Christos Yannaras and the official teaching of the Russian Orthodox Church, Moscow Patriarchate), the study argues that there also existed a movement from the late 19th to the mid-20th centuries of Russian Orthodox religious thinkers in the neo-idealist and Russian liberal tradition that articulated a broad based and positive Christian humanism that upheld a vision of personhood, human dignity, human rights and natural law within the context of divinisation (theosis). Drawing on some of these thinkers, especially those in the sophiological tradition (including Vladimir Solov’ev, Sergii Bulgakov and Semyon Frank), and drawing links with Jacques Maritain, it looks successively at the following issues: human personhood as a sacral uniqueness and dignity found within the image and likeness of God and this being the foundation of human rights as an inviolable creative capacity seen above all in freedom of conscience; that human rights and freedom of conscience are based on natural law and this comes from the eternal law which is grounded not only in creaturely Wisdom but also in the Divine Wisdom so that we may say that the image and likeness of God is a “sophianic image” reflecting the Divine Sophia and that in God as Trinity, by extension, one encounters the image of the human being; that there is an organic and preeternal Trinitarian link between natural law and human rights and that we can see this link within the logoi spermatikoi or seminal words tradition as found within the thinking of Basil the Great and Maximus the Confessor; and human rights are not merely a capacity for creativity, right as the power of freedom, but that rights can be understood as a calling or vocation of humanity for perfectibility, by which is understood divinization (theosis). The essay concludes with words affirming not only the importance of defending human rights in order to protect the marginalized or to stand against tyranny but the need to have a wholistic Orthodox theological vision of rights as being nestled within the life of the holy Trinity with human rights understood as both an inviolable creative capacity but also this potentiality being a calling and obligation to divinize the world.
https://brill.com/view/journals/jecs/aop/article-10.1163-17831520-20240043/article-10.1163-17831520-20240043.xml
Uploads
Books by Brandon Gallaher
Purchase: https://www.amazon.com/Living-Christ-Theological-Georges-Florovsky/dp/0567701859/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1631537768&sr=8-4
Table of Contents: https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/living-christ-9780567701855/
Preface: His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I
Foreword: John Zizioulas (Metropolitan of Pergamon, Ecumenical Patriarchate)
Introduction: John Chryssavgis and Brandon Gallaher.
PART I GEORGES FLOROVSKY: LIFE AND WORK
1.The Theological Legacy of Archpriest Georges Florovsky
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew
2.The Diachronic Significance of Fr. Georges Florovsky's Theological Contribution
Metropolitan John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon
3.Three Witnesses: Bulgakov, Florovsky, Lossky*
Metropolitan Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia
4.Georges Florovsky and the Sophiological Controversy*
Alexis Klimoff
5.Georges Florovsky and Sergius Bulgakov: "In Peace Let Us Love One Another”
Paul Ladouceur
6.Father Georges Florovsky and Archimandrite Sophrony Sakharov: A Theological Encounter
Nikolai Sakharov
7.The Newly Published Correspondence between Fr. Georges Florovsky and Fr. Alexander Schmemann: Reflections on Leadership
Paul L. Gavrilyuk
8.A “Theology of Facts”: Christ in the Theological Thought of Fr. Georges Florovsky and Fr. John Meyendorff
Joost van Rossum
PART II NEOPATRISTIC SYNTHESIS: THEOLOGY AND METHODOLOGY
9.“Waiting for the Barbarians”: Identity and Polemicism in the Neopatristic Synthesis of Georges Florovsky*
Brandon Gallaher
10.Neopatristic Synthesis and Ecumenism: Toward the “Reintegration” of Christian Tradition*
Matthew Baker (+2015)
11.The Ecclesial Hellenism of Fr. Georges Florovsky*
Christos Yannaras
12.The Emergence of the Neopatristic Synthesis: Content, Challenges, Limits*
Marcus Plested
13.Christian Hellenism in the Neopatristic Synthesis of Archpriest Georges Florovsky
Metropolitan Chrysostomos (Savvatos) of Messinia
14.Apophaticism, Cataphaticism, Mystical Theology and the Christian Hellenism of Fr. Georges Florovsky*
Pantelis Kalaitzidis
15.Florovsky's “Predicament of the Christian Historian” and the Orthodox Church's Predicament with History Today
Vassa Larin
16.From Synthesis to Symphony
John Behr
PART III THEOLOGY AND ECCLESIOLOGY:HISTORY AND MISSION
17.Beginning with Christ: the Key to Anthropology in the Dogmatic Work of Florovsky
Alexis Torrance
18.Creatio ex nihilo and creatio ex amore: Florovsky, Bulgakov, and Zizioulas in Dialogue on Theological Methodology
Nikolaos Asproulis
19.Ecclesiology in Relation to History: Church and World in the Christian Vision of Fr. Georges Florovsky
Will Cohen
20.Overcoming Florovsky's Opposition of the Charismatic to the Canonical in “On the Limits of the Church”*
Alexander Rentel
21.Fr. Georges Florovsky and Mission: Witness “To,” “With,” or “Beyond” “Sacred Hellenism”?
Athanasios N. Papathanasiou
22.The Timeliness of the Patristic Thought, and the Contribution of Fr. Georges Florovsky to Contemporary Theological Dialogue
Metropolitan Gennadios (Limouris) of Sassima
23.Georges Florovsky and the World Council of Churches
Archbishop Job (Getcha) of Telmessos
24.Fr Georges Florovsky's Understanding of the New Mission in the West
Ivana Noble
PART IV THE BODY OF THE LIVING CHRIST: AN ORTHODOX INTERPRETATION OF THE CHURCH
25.Introduction to Georges Florovsky's The Body of the Living Christ: An Orthodox Interpretation of the Church
Robert M. Arida
26.The Body of the Living Christ: An Orthodox Interpretation of the Church331
Georges Florovsky
Bibliography
Index
Table of Contents
Preface xi
Editorial Introduction xv
Introduction 1
Part 1 Creation, Incarnation and Redemption 31
1 Creation and Createdness 33
2 Preface to In Ligno Crucis 65
3 In Ligno Crucis : Th e Church Fathers’ Doctrine of Redemption 71
4 Th e Lamb of God 81
5 The Ever-Virgin Mother of God 95
6 The Stumbling-Block 107
Part 2 The Nature of Theology 113
7 Revelation, Philosophy and Theology 115
8 Western Influences in Russian Theology 1 29
9 Patristics and Modern Theology 153
10 Breaks and Links 159
11 The Legacy and the Task of Orthodox Theology 185
12 The Predicament of the Christian Historian 193
13 Saint Gregory Palamas and the Tradition of the Fathers 221
14 The Christian Hellenism 233
15 ‘On the Authority of the Fathers’ 237
16 ‘Theological Will’ 241
Part 3 Ecclesiology and Ecumenism 245
17 The Limits of the Church 247
18 Sobornost: Th e Catholicity of the Church 257
19 The Body of the Living Christ 273
20 Confessional Loyalty in the Ecumenical Movement 279x
21 The Ethos of the Orthodox Church 289
22 The Ecumenical Dialogue 303
Part 4 Scripture, Worship and Eschatology 309
23 Eschatology in the Patristic Age 311
24 Starets Silouan 325
25 Scripture and Tradition 329
26 The Worshipping Church 335
Epilogue: ‘Let Us Choose Life’ 347
Index 353
Collaboratively written by an interdisciplinary and ecumenical team of scholars, the argument draws on expertise in biblical studies, systematics, and historical theology to fuse critical biblical exegesis with a powerful theological paradigm that generates an apophatic and constructive Christian eschatology. The authors, however, have done more than tackle a daunting theological problem: as the group traverses issues from higher criticism through doctrine and into liturgy and ethics, they present an innovative approach for how to do Christian theology in the twenty-first-century academy.
Reviews of My Books by Brandon Gallaher
Reports by Brandon Gallaher
• This project investigated issues of sexual diversity within the Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition. These present some of the most complex and contentious questions facing the Orthodox Church today and and public debate over them is often polarised.
• Responses of the Orthodox Church to questions of sexual diversity must be contextualised within the church’s distinctive theological tradition, history, and contemporary geopolitical setting, noting especially the prevalence of anti-Western sentiments today.
• The attitude of most Orthodox Christians towards issues of sexual diversity may be characterised as “conservative” in comparison with prevailing attitudes in the secular West. Despite wide consensus, there is diversity in pastoral practice and thought.
• Theologians can find it difficult to agree on the reasoning and sources that under-gird received teachings and practices. For some, questions of sexual diversity are settled as first principles of Orthodoxy, whereas for others they are secondary and contextual.
• This project demonstrated that polarisation of discourse on controversial religious issues can be overcome through the careful construction of spaces for dialogue. This relies, above all, on a willingness of organisers not to foreclose difficult conversations.
• Civil society actors can advance the work of this project through educating them-selves and others, co-operation with religious actors, enabling more deep conversations, using our project resources, promoting our project’s work, and patronising further research.
https://www.fordham.edu/download/downloads/id/14755/Exeter_Fordham_BV_Final_Report.pdf
https://www.fordham.edu/orthodoxy/bridgingvoices
• The Eastern Orthodox Church (EOC) is one of the largest Christian bodies in the world today. It is a family of independent churches which regard themselves collectively and individually as the “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.” The EOC is neither Protestant nor Catholic; it is also distinct from the Oriental Orthodox churches (e.g. Armenian, Ethiopian, and Coptic churches). Its approximately 200 million members are today mostly found in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, but there is a large and influential “diaspora” located mainly in Western Europe, North America, and Australia. The primus inter pares of Orthodox bishops is the Ecumenical Patriarch.
• Today, the EOC remains committed to models of gender and sexuality and related disciplines which were formulated in pre-modernity. Many Orthodox subscribe to a version of “gender essentialism” which regards biological sex, gender, and gender roles, as stable, transhistorical realities, such that all human beings are essentially and permanently either male or female. The Church’s disciplines include, among other things, an understanding of marriage as the union of a male and a female and only sexual activity within its bounds is morally sanctioned. Other gender identities and sexualities, whether publicly acknowledged and actualized or not, are officially condemned, but pastoral responses vary, especially according to country and culture.
• Most Orthodox (especially those in post-Soviet Eastern Europe) accept the Church’s teachings and disciplines on sexuality as part of a complete package of received traditions which is beyond scrutiny. These teachings and disciplines are widely believed to derive from a universal and univocal Orthodox discourse on gender and sexuality that is clearly and unquestionably manifest in the Church’s tradition (which includes the Bible). It is popularly believed that the truth of current Orthodox teachings, disciplines, structures, and practices can be “proven” by demonstrating their historical continuity within the Church as an institution. In many cases, attitudes to sexual diversity correspond to a generally socially-conservative attitude.
• Many of the same Orthodox (in Eastern Europe, but also some Western converts) regard the Church’s opposition to sexual diversity not only as a de facto reality but as a matter of dogmatic truth, which must be defended in the contemporary world against the decadent secularism of “the West” and its rejection of “traditional values.” Defenders of current practice often regards the Church as being under attack. The small number of Orthodox who do speak or act publicly against the Church’s current teachings often face exclusion from Church life and in some cases they are subjected to defamation of character, harassment, and threats (and acts) of violence. In many traditionally Orthodox countries, rejection by the Church is sometimes accompanied by rejection by family, friends, and the wider community, according to wider social norms.
• A minority of Orthodox today publicly challenge the Church’s teachings and disciplines concerning sexual diversity, and more hold contrary opinions in private. The status quo is often questioned, in the first instance, as a result of pressing pastoral realities on the ground. Some accommodation of sexual diversity already occurs in the shadows and without open acknowledgment, particularly outside Eastern Europe. A very small number of communities both practice open hospitality towards LGBTQ+ persons and many more pastors practice functional inclusion while maintaining the official positions of the Church when pressed to do so. In some larger cities, “LGBTQ+ friendly” parishes exist with the knowledge of the bishop and his blessing for the priest to extend as much pastoral and sacramental care as possible.
• The 2017 Pew report on Orthodox Christianity in the 21st Century shows that a majority of Orthodox in the USA and Greece say society should be more accepting of homosexuality, and a majority in the USA (which has civil same-sex marriage) are in favour of allowing gay couples to marry. At least one local Orthodox Church in Western Europe permits the celebration of a service of celebration for same-sex couples in civil marriages and integrates gay couples into many of its communities. There is a noteworthy difference of opinion on many topics between post-Soviet and non-Soviet countries.
• Among Orthodox theologians, there is a wide range of opinion on the received teachings and a growing recognition that these realities need to be grappled with openly. A small but growing number advocate for the open inclusion of LGBTQ+ people in Church life and same-sex marriage. Intellectual challenges are often expressed in terms of the historical contingency of theorizations of gender and sex (and especially shifts between pre-modernity and modernity) and the absence or inconsistency of theological reasoning in this area.
https://www.fordham.edu/download/downloads/id/14010/BV_Report.pdf
https://www.fordham.edu/orthodoxy/bridgingvoices
Articles in Journals by Brandon Gallaher
https://brill.com/view/journals/jecs/aop/article-10.1163-17831520-20240043/article-10.1163-17831520-20240043.xml
Purchase: https://www.amazon.com/Living-Christ-Theological-Georges-Florovsky/dp/0567701859/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1631537768&sr=8-4
Table of Contents: https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/living-christ-9780567701855/
Preface: His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I
Foreword: John Zizioulas (Metropolitan of Pergamon, Ecumenical Patriarchate)
Introduction: John Chryssavgis and Brandon Gallaher.
PART I GEORGES FLOROVSKY: LIFE AND WORK
1.The Theological Legacy of Archpriest Georges Florovsky
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew
2.The Diachronic Significance of Fr. Georges Florovsky's Theological Contribution
Metropolitan John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon
3.Three Witnesses: Bulgakov, Florovsky, Lossky*
Metropolitan Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia
4.Georges Florovsky and the Sophiological Controversy*
Alexis Klimoff
5.Georges Florovsky and Sergius Bulgakov: "In Peace Let Us Love One Another”
Paul Ladouceur
6.Father Georges Florovsky and Archimandrite Sophrony Sakharov: A Theological Encounter
Nikolai Sakharov
7.The Newly Published Correspondence between Fr. Georges Florovsky and Fr. Alexander Schmemann: Reflections on Leadership
Paul L. Gavrilyuk
8.A “Theology of Facts”: Christ in the Theological Thought of Fr. Georges Florovsky and Fr. John Meyendorff
Joost van Rossum
PART II NEOPATRISTIC SYNTHESIS: THEOLOGY AND METHODOLOGY
9.“Waiting for the Barbarians”: Identity and Polemicism in the Neopatristic Synthesis of Georges Florovsky*
Brandon Gallaher
10.Neopatristic Synthesis and Ecumenism: Toward the “Reintegration” of Christian Tradition*
Matthew Baker (+2015)
11.The Ecclesial Hellenism of Fr. Georges Florovsky*
Christos Yannaras
12.The Emergence of the Neopatristic Synthesis: Content, Challenges, Limits*
Marcus Plested
13.Christian Hellenism in the Neopatristic Synthesis of Archpriest Georges Florovsky
Metropolitan Chrysostomos (Savvatos) of Messinia
14.Apophaticism, Cataphaticism, Mystical Theology and the Christian Hellenism of Fr. Georges Florovsky*
Pantelis Kalaitzidis
15.Florovsky's “Predicament of the Christian Historian” and the Orthodox Church's Predicament with History Today
Vassa Larin
16.From Synthesis to Symphony
John Behr
PART III THEOLOGY AND ECCLESIOLOGY:HISTORY AND MISSION
17.Beginning with Christ: the Key to Anthropology in the Dogmatic Work of Florovsky
Alexis Torrance
18.Creatio ex nihilo and creatio ex amore: Florovsky, Bulgakov, and Zizioulas in Dialogue on Theological Methodology
Nikolaos Asproulis
19.Ecclesiology in Relation to History: Church and World in the Christian Vision of Fr. Georges Florovsky
Will Cohen
20.Overcoming Florovsky's Opposition of the Charismatic to the Canonical in “On the Limits of the Church”*
Alexander Rentel
21.Fr. Georges Florovsky and Mission: Witness “To,” “With,” or “Beyond” “Sacred Hellenism”?
Athanasios N. Papathanasiou
22.The Timeliness of the Patristic Thought, and the Contribution of Fr. Georges Florovsky to Contemporary Theological Dialogue
Metropolitan Gennadios (Limouris) of Sassima
23.Georges Florovsky and the World Council of Churches
Archbishop Job (Getcha) of Telmessos
24.Fr Georges Florovsky's Understanding of the New Mission in the West
Ivana Noble
PART IV THE BODY OF THE LIVING CHRIST: AN ORTHODOX INTERPRETATION OF THE CHURCH
25.Introduction to Georges Florovsky's The Body of the Living Christ: An Orthodox Interpretation of the Church
Robert M. Arida
26.The Body of the Living Christ: An Orthodox Interpretation of the Church331
Georges Florovsky
Bibliography
Index
Table of Contents
Preface xi
Editorial Introduction xv
Introduction 1
Part 1 Creation, Incarnation and Redemption 31
1 Creation and Createdness 33
2 Preface to In Ligno Crucis 65
3 In Ligno Crucis : Th e Church Fathers’ Doctrine of Redemption 71
4 Th e Lamb of God 81
5 The Ever-Virgin Mother of God 95
6 The Stumbling-Block 107
Part 2 The Nature of Theology 113
7 Revelation, Philosophy and Theology 115
8 Western Influences in Russian Theology 1 29
9 Patristics and Modern Theology 153
10 Breaks and Links 159
11 The Legacy and the Task of Orthodox Theology 185
12 The Predicament of the Christian Historian 193
13 Saint Gregory Palamas and the Tradition of the Fathers 221
14 The Christian Hellenism 233
15 ‘On the Authority of the Fathers’ 237
16 ‘Theological Will’ 241
Part 3 Ecclesiology and Ecumenism 245
17 The Limits of the Church 247
18 Sobornost: Th e Catholicity of the Church 257
19 The Body of the Living Christ 273
20 Confessional Loyalty in the Ecumenical Movement 279x
21 The Ethos of the Orthodox Church 289
22 The Ecumenical Dialogue 303
Part 4 Scripture, Worship and Eschatology 309
23 Eschatology in the Patristic Age 311
24 Starets Silouan 325
25 Scripture and Tradition 329
26 The Worshipping Church 335
Epilogue: ‘Let Us Choose Life’ 347
Index 353
Collaboratively written by an interdisciplinary and ecumenical team of scholars, the argument draws on expertise in biblical studies, systematics, and historical theology to fuse critical biblical exegesis with a powerful theological paradigm that generates an apophatic and constructive Christian eschatology. The authors, however, have done more than tackle a daunting theological problem: as the group traverses issues from higher criticism through doctrine and into liturgy and ethics, they present an innovative approach for how to do Christian theology in the twenty-first-century academy.
• This project investigated issues of sexual diversity within the Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition. These present some of the most complex and contentious questions facing the Orthodox Church today and and public debate over them is often polarised.
• Responses of the Orthodox Church to questions of sexual diversity must be contextualised within the church’s distinctive theological tradition, history, and contemporary geopolitical setting, noting especially the prevalence of anti-Western sentiments today.
• The attitude of most Orthodox Christians towards issues of sexual diversity may be characterised as “conservative” in comparison with prevailing attitudes in the secular West. Despite wide consensus, there is diversity in pastoral practice and thought.
• Theologians can find it difficult to agree on the reasoning and sources that under-gird received teachings and practices. For some, questions of sexual diversity are settled as first principles of Orthodoxy, whereas for others they are secondary and contextual.
• This project demonstrated that polarisation of discourse on controversial religious issues can be overcome through the careful construction of spaces for dialogue. This relies, above all, on a willingness of organisers not to foreclose difficult conversations.
• Civil society actors can advance the work of this project through educating them-selves and others, co-operation with religious actors, enabling more deep conversations, using our project resources, promoting our project’s work, and patronising further research.
https://www.fordham.edu/download/downloads/id/14755/Exeter_Fordham_BV_Final_Report.pdf
https://www.fordham.edu/orthodoxy/bridgingvoices
• The Eastern Orthodox Church (EOC) is one of the largest Christian bodies in the world today. It is a family of independent churches which regard themselves collectively and individually as the “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.” The EOC is neither Protestant nor Catholic; it is also distinct from the Oriental Orthodox churches (e.g. Armenian, Ethiopian, and Coptic churches). Its approximately 200 million members are today mostly found in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, but there is a large and influential “diaspora” located mainly in Western Europe, North America, and Australia. The primus inter pares of Orthodox bishops is the Ecumenical Patriarch.
• Today, the EOC remains committed to models of gender and sexuality and related disciplines which were formulated in pre-modernity. Many Orthodox subscribe to a version of “gender essentialism” which regards biological sex, gender, and gender roles, as stable, transhistorical realities, such that all human beings are essentially and permanently either male or female. The Church’s disciplines include, among other things, an understanding of marriage as the union of a male and a female and only sexual activity within its bounds is morally sanctioned. Other gender identities and sexualities, whether publicly acknowledged and actualized or not, are officially condemned, but pastoral responses vary, especially according to country and culture.
• Most Orthodox (especially those in post-Soviet Eastern Europe) accept the Church’s teachings and disciplines on sexuality as part of a complete package of received traditions which is beyond scrutiny. These teachings and disciplines are widely believed to derive from a universal and univocal Orthodox discourse on gender and sexuality that is clearly and unquestionably manifest in the Church’s tradition (which includes the Bible). It is popularly believed that the truth of current Orthodox teachings, disciplines, structures, and practices can be “proven” by demonstrating their historical continuity within the Church as an institution. In many cases, attitudes to sexual diversity correspond to a generally socially-conservative attitude.
• Many of the same Orthodox (in Eastern Europe, but also some Western converts) regard the Church’s opposition to sexual diversity not only as a de facto reality but as a matter of dogmatic truth, which must be defended in the contemporary world against the decadent secularism of “the West” and its rejection of “traditional values.” Defenders of current practice often regards the Church as being under attack. The small number of Orthodox who do speak or act publicly against the Church’s current teachings often face exclusion from Church life and in some cases they are subjected to defamation of character, harassment, and threats (and acts) of violence. In many traditionally Orthodox countries, rejection by the Church is sometimes accompanied by rejection by family, friends, and the wider community, according to wider social norms.
• A minority of Orthodox today publicly challenge the Church’s teachings and disciplines concerning sexual diversity, and more hold contrary opinions in private. The status quo is often questioned, in the first instance, as a result of pressing pastoral realities on the ground. Some accommodation of sexual diversity already occurs in the shadows and without open acknowledgment, particularly outside Eastern Europe. A very small number of communities both practice open hospitality towards LGBTQ+ persons and many more pastors practice functional inclusion while maintaining the official positions of the Church when pressed to do so. In some larger cities, “LGBTQ+ friendly” parishes exist with the knowledge of the bishop and his blessing for the priest to extend as much pastoral and sacramental care as possible.
• The 2017 Pew report on Orthodox Christianity in the 21st Century shows that a majority of Orthodox in the USA and Greece say society should be more accepting of homosexuality, and a majority in the USA (which has civil same-sex marriage) are in favour of allowing gay couples to marry. At least one local Orthodox Church in Western Europe permits the celebration of a service of celebration for same-sex couples in civil marriages and integrates gay couples into many of its communities. There is a noteworthy difference of opinion on many topics between post-Soviet and non-Soviet countries.
• Among Orthodox theologians, there is a wide range of opinion on the received teachings and a growing recognition that these realities need to be grappled with openly. A small but growing number advocate for the open inclusion of LGBTQ+ people in Church life and same-sex marriage. Intellectual challenges are often expressed in terms of the historical contingency of theorizations of gender and sex (and especially shifts between pre-modernity and modernity) and the absence or inconsistency of theological reasoning in this area.
https://www.fordham.edu/download/downloads/id/14010/BV_Report.pdf
https://www.fordham.edu/orthodoxy/bridgingvoices
https://brill.com/view/journals/jecs/aop/article-10.1163-17831520-20240043/article-10.1163-17831520-20240043.xml
The Geo-Politics of Pope Francis, Annua Nuntia Lovaniensia (Leuven: Peeters, 2019), 169-198.
This article distances the classic Patristic teaching of Eastern
Orthodoxy on theosis from the pseudo-religious ideology of Western
transhumanism. By appealing to the Silver Age of Russian theologians
a century ago, today’s transhumanist vision is dubbed Mangodhood, an
idolatrous construction of a technological Tower of Babel. In contrast,
the classical Orthodox teaching of deification or theosis relies on the
spiritual grace of the true God, rendering the true goal of religion to be
Godmanhood.
itself as the fullness of the Christian faith. They also both see ecumenical encounter (whether in dialogue or in condemnation of the Other) as being a species of civilisational dialogue between two very different realities of Christian East and West. Ultimately, it is contended, both parties have much to learn from one another so that their opposition is not a sterile but a creative antinomy.
https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/9783748949169/performing-christianities?page=1
https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/9783748949169-247/an-alternate-modernity-for-orthodox-christianity-two-challenges-from-western-modernity-sexual-diversity-and-nationalism?page=1
The essay explores two modern Western challenges (sexual diversity, nationalism) and creative theological responses to them in Orthodox Christianity. The first case study looks at the Exeter-Fordham project, “Contemporary Eastern Orthodox Identity and the Challenges of Pluralism and Sexual Diversity in a Secular Age” (2018-20), and its attempt to respond constructively to sexual diversity. The second case study looks at “A Declaration on the Russian World (Russkii Mir) Teaching” drafted in critical reaction to the nationalism of Putin and the Russian Orthodox Church in its ideological underwriting of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. It is argued that we should not imagine that the Orthodox Church and its cultures will embrace Western (post-)modernity but it must strive to articulate an “alternate modernity” (with responses to key issues) unique to Orthodox ethos, teaching and history.
Key-Words Orthodoxy, Sexual Diversity, Nationalism, Modernity, Secularism, Pre-Modernity, Russian World, Homosexuality, Ukraine
"RUSSIAN WORLD" AS AN HERETICAL DOCTRINE
AND THE JUSTIFICATION OF RUSSIA'S WAR
AGAINST UKRAINE
The article reveals the essence of the Russian political doctrine of «Russian World», which is a modern form of ethnophyletic and ethnonationalist fascism, as deadly as Nazi ideology. This heresy is sometimes mistakenly equated with the Orthodox faith and the Orthodox Church. The heresy of the Russian World endangers the faith professed by the Orthodox Church by including it in the official church teaching of the largest Orthodox Church in the world, because it has been systematically preached and proclaimed by Patriarch Kirill and various senior hierarchs of the Russian Church – and is a violent teaching used nto harm the innocent in Ukraine.
http://www.orthodoxconference.theosch.auth.gr/index_eng_bul.htm
http://www.orthodoxconference.theosch.auth.gr/keimena_final/64_Gallaher_Brandon.pdf
as a triumph of Orthodoxy over the Catholic West. Not so, says an expert'
https://publicorthodoxy.org/2016/04/22/the-orthodox-diaspora-mother-churches-mission-and-the-future/
from an Orthodox theological perspective. By contrast, the Orthodox scholars systematically outline affirmations drawn from Scripture and the Holy Tradition of Orthodox Christianity. Finally, the declaration calls all to be mindful of the theological principles outlined in their decisions in church politics.