This session explores diverse but often neglected geographic, historical, and theological territories within Orthodox Christian tradition. The papers in this session analyze such topics as modern theology in the Malankara Orthodox Church of India, medieval theological and liturgical manuscript traditions in Georgia, Sergei Bulgakov and John Behr’s engagement with Nicene theology, and the theological implications of divergences in Eucharistic practice in Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Western Christian traditions.
Paulose Mar Gregorios (1922 – 1996) was an important theologian of the second half of the twentieth century from the Malankara (Indian) Orthodox Church. Gregorios played an important role in ecumenical movements, including a tenure as the President of the WCC. His theological works merged Eastern Orthodox fathers (particularly Gregory of Nyssa) with Indian thought and addressed the political situations in India and the world. Freedom was an important theme in several of his writings. As we consider the relationship between Eastern Orthodox thought and contemporary political and social change, Gregorios’ vision of the relationship between spiritual freedom and political freedom helps us. One pressing question for Eastern Orthodox today is the relationship between ascetical (inner) freedom to social and political freedom. In this paper I will analyze key aspects of Gregorios’ theology of freedom and suggest ways in which it can contribute to present Eastern Orthodox concerns.
Saint Maximus the Confessor (580–662) is a key figure in Christian theology and philosophy, whose work continues to influence Eastern Orthodox thought. and contribute to reconstructing the original Greek texts. His writings, particularly on the nature of Christ and human will, address critical theological debates of his time. Maximus defended the doctrine of the Two Wills of Christ, asserting both a divine and human will, which played a significant role in the Christological controversies of the 7th and 8th centuries.
The Georgian translations of Maximus’s treatises are vital for preserving his ideas and understanding their influence in the Caucasus. These translations play a critical role in preserving his works. These translations, particularly those from the 12th-century Gelati manuscript, offer insights into the adaptation of Byzantine theology in the Christian East. They also serve as an essential resource for reconstructing lost parts of the original Greek texts.
The New Iadgari is a significant Georgian hymnographic collection from the 9th–10th centuries, encompassing hymns for the liturgical year. Despite its importance, its Georgian sources remain underexplored. Recent discoveries, such as the Greek manuscript Sinai MG NF 56+5 and the Syriac version in Sinai MS Syriac 4, provide valuable insights into the text's transmission and evolution.
A unique feature of the Georgian New Iadgari is the commemoration of the “Burnt Fathers” on March 19. This narrative, absent in the Greek and Syriac versions, recounts the martyrdom of ascetic monks attacked and burned by their enemies. The liturgical structure includes stichera on "Lord, I have cried," a mattins canon, and stichera on Lauds, emphasizing themes of faith and sacrifice.
The New Iadgari highlights Georgian contributions to Eastern Christian hymnography and reflects the dynamic adaptation of liturgical texts across linguistic and cultural boundaries.
Despite their expressed commitment to conciliar theology, the modern Orthodox theologians, Sergius Bulgakov and John Behr both call into question the coherence of the credal confession that the Son of God was begotten before the ages. Specifically, these two theologians reject as nonsensical the suggestion that anything existed “before” time or even, in Bulgakov’s case, to describe creation as having a beginning (Behr 2019, 19ff., 248; Bulgakov 2002, 29). Yet this distinction between “before” and “after” is one of the pillars of the distinction between the begetting of the Son and His making of creatures, a distinction that is championed by Athanasius, enshrined in the Nicene creed, and endorsed by Behr and Bulgakov. This paper explores the precise nature of the incoherence of the Nicene “before.” Is this incoherence a sign of the crudeness of Nicene theology or an unavoidable feature of any theological language that seeks to describe the paradox of a creation in time by an eternal God?
This paper examines key theological and liturgical distinctions between Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Western Christian traditions concerning the Eucharist, particularly the use of leavened versus unleavened bread and the role of the Holy Spirit in the transformation of the elements. The Western tradition, influenced by Augustinian theology and the doctrine of Original Sin, emphasizes Christ’s crucifixion and atoning sacrifice, reflected in the use of unleavened bread. In contrast, the Eastern Churches prioritize Christ’s resurrection and the process of theosis, symbolized by leavened bread. Additionally, while Western Churches define the moment of consecration at the words of institution, Eastern traditions emphasize the entire Eucharistic liturgy, culminating in the epiclesis. These differences may stem from varying interpretations of the Last Supper in the Synoptic and Johannine narratives. Understanding these variations highlights deeper theological divergences and contributes to a more nuanced appreciation of Eucharistic theology across Christian traditions.