The Orthodox Neo-Patristic Movement’s Encounter with the Christian ‘Other’: An Ecumenical Hermeneutics of Receptivity (original) (raw)

An Orthodox Ecumenical Hermeneutics: Dumitru Stăniloae on Interpreting the Fathers in an Ecumenical Context 1

Contacts, 2019

My intention in this paper is to provide an alternative approach to ecumenism, one that accepts diversity, while it remains firmly anchored in tradition. This vision belongs to the Romanian theologian Dumitru Stăniloae (1903-1993) and sees the multitude of Christian denominations as a useful resource for Orthodox critical self-reflection and learning. The backbone of his positive appraisal of ecumenical diversity, I will argue further, is a different account of the role of theology. Although a staunch traditionalist, Stăniloae sees the task of theology not simply as preserving the tradition of the Church, but of guiding the Church to deification throughout history. This process of discernment is based on two hermeneutical principles (advancement in the knowledge of God and greater union of human beings in Christ). These principles culminate in Stăniloae’s ecumenical model (open sobornicity), while also serving as hermeneutical foundations for sensitive ecumenical loci. Thus, the goal of this article is twofold: to reconsider the role assigned to theology and to propose Stăniloae’s interpretative principles as the bases of the Orthodox ecumenical hermeneutics.

Father Dumitru Stăniloae and the Ecumenical Dialogue Between Disproof and Acceptance

This paper attempts to offer an answer to the question: how " ecumenical " was Dumitru Stăniloae? In fact, in terms of participation in the ecumenical dialogue, there are several stages in his life and work: in a first stage, until his release from the communist prisons (1964), Father Stăniloae did not take part in this dialogue; in the second stage, he became an active participant in various ecumenical meetings; finally, his retirement and the freedom gained after the 1989 Revolution witnessed the end of the ecumenical participation on behalf of the great Romanian theologian. The end of the paper offers several possible answers to this wavering trajectory.

Nationalist and Trinitarian Visions of the Church in the Theology of Dumitru Staniloae

This article examines ideas about human personhood, the Church, and ecumenicism in the thought of the Romanian theologian Dumitru Stăniloae (1903-1993). It argues that Stăniloae developed his thinking on these issues during two different periods of his life. His interwar writings discuss the debates in nationalist terms, while those works written in the 1970s and 1980s describe Christian unity through a Trinitarian framework. Despite the extremely different logic behind them, Stăniloae’s two ecclesial models are remarkably similar. In order to emphasize how profoundly historical context has shaped Orthodox thinking about the Church, the article briefly compares Stăniloae’s work to that of Nikolai Afanasiev, Vladimir Lossky, and John Zizioulas, three Orthodox theologians who wrote extensively about ecclesiology and ecumenicism.

Patristic Tradition in the Neo-Patristic Synthesis of Theologians Georges Florovsky and Dumitru Stăniloae

Teologia, 2021

In this study we aimed at understanding the concept of Tradition in the thinking of theologians Georges Florovsky and Dumitru Stăniloae. I propose to highlight the main contributions of these theologians regarding the importance of Tradition in the current theological approach. Although the writings of the Holy Fathers weren't unfamiliar to the Orthodox theologians before these two fathers, as well as to the theologians from their time, the difference consisted of the way of relationing to the patristic work and thought. Georges Florovsky is the theologian who offi cially announced at the Athens Congress of 1936 the need to restructure Orthodox theology on its patristic foundations by returning to its origins, to patristic thinking unaltered by rationalism, abstract scholasticism, idealism, syncretism, and religious individualism. Although he didn't elaborate a proper synthesis, he laid down the foundations of a new method in theology: the neo-patristic method. On the other hand, Father Stăniloae rediscovers the importance of Palamite theology, Hesychasm, and Philokalism, and he accomplishes a true neo-patristic synthesis, able to free the Orthodox theology from those Western infl uences that Father Florovsky pointed out in his writings. The present study aims to expose the main directions of the neo-patristic synthesis related to the dynamic and creative updating of the Church Tradition in the works of Fathers Georges Florovsky and Dumitru Stăniloae.