Vrame's Four Types of Orthopraxy

Four types of Orthodopraxy

In "Four types of 'Orthodoxpraxy' among Orthodox Christians in America," Orthodox educator Anton C. Vrame borrows the nomenclature used to define 'types' of Judaism to discuss four potential approaches to Orthopraxy. Orthopraxy is defined by Vrame as "the behaviour of individual Orthodox believers or communities, and their attitudes toward and their appropriation of the Orthodox tradition." He also states that this includes "the observable behaviours of the Orthodox parish, monastery, diocese, and so forth, as related to lived expressions of the Orthodox tradition."

My initial concerns with this sort of demarcation and classification is that could lead to some of the reductionism, labling or "broad-stroking" that is sometimes characteristic of the political arena (ie. are you Conservative or Liberal, Democrat or Republican, Green or NDP, etc.) There's also a danger of misinterpreting what Vrame is trying to present and look at these 'Orthopraxies' with a categorical lens (ie. separating the life of the Church into identifiable 'buckets' of spirituality, theology, musicology, social issues, etc), when in fact, Orthodoxy involves more of a symphonia (ie. an integrated approach, a raised awareness, and encounter of apophatic mystery).

So I suggest that the reading of Vrames observations should encourage the orthodox reader to always remember there is overlap in the 'categories' and 'types' of Orthopraxy. It becomes important to see that Vrame is identifying these four types in order to address some of the deficiencies that are characteristic of extremes. So while he does use categories the direction of his hypothesis suggests that he would recommend the more balanced "Traditional Orthopraxy" (which seems to be the Orthopraxy most concerned with recapitulating and synthesising the man-made categories of thought and life into the Eucharistic embrace of the Orthodox Church.)

Keeping the importance of resisting compartmentalisation and reductionism, the four views that Vrame discusses is still helpful in articulating what the Orthodox Church is encountering in North America. Part of the issue may actually be related to the fact that most Orthodox jurisdictions see themselves as "diasporic" instead of responsible for the restoration of the lands that they're currently in (ie. our perpetual identification with immigrant Orthodoxy is increasingly making Orthodoxy susceptible to the denominationalism that immigrant Protestant Christians in America developed).

Part of the importance of Vrame's essay is his recommendation for further dialogue and study on this issue of praxis. It's related in many ways to the Orthodox understanding of Orthodoxy, of our witness and ethos. Jurisdictionalism and nationalism are limiting the scope of mission in the Orthodox world, while lack of Patristic and Liturgical self-analysis and awareness is permitting non-Orthodox thought and praxis to take hold 'from within." The question of praxis, of lex orandi lex est credendi, does have implications on Orthodox missiology and the way the Church continues to bless all of creation and create Saints.

Perhaps further critical studies and self-reflection might be beneficial for Christians who pray every moment in the presence of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, praying earnestly for the life of the world.

A synopsis of Vrame's Four Types of Orthodopraxy in North America

Ultra-conservative/Fundamentalist Orthopraxy:

Described as having 1) reactivity to the marginalization of religion, 2) selectivity, 3) moral Manicheanism, 4) absolutism and inerrancy, and 5) millennialism and Messianism. Furthermore, this type exhibits the organizational characteristics they describe: 1) elect, chosen membership, 2) sharp boundaries, 3) authoritarian organization, and 4) behavioral requirements.

In Orthodox Christianity, a fundamentalist reading of texts would include not only the Bible, but also other significant texts. It should be noted that not all Ultra-conservatives are Fundamentalists, but all Fundamentalists are Ultra-conservatives.

Traditionalist Orthopraxy:

Traditional orthopraxy takes a commonsensical and pragmatic approach to religious appropriation and expression, tending to change slowly, and permitting praxis to evolve over time. Change never outpaces the desires of the community, or becomes disruptive, since evolution occurs as a natural process of an "organic community.”

Reform Orthopraxy:

Reform orthopraxy refers to the intentional adaptation of the tradition to a new situation. Reform, as a conscious, intentional process, usually is implemented to correct a perceived wrong. In the case of Reform orthopraxy, intentional changes were made so Orthodox Christians could adapt to a new reality, to “fit in” and be "accepted” by the wider culture; or, they were made to demonstrate that Orthodox Christianity was a "modem religion.”

Reconstructionist Orthopraxy:

Individuals and communities striving to “rethink” orthopraxy, in order to develop new expressions for America. Among these types, we would expect to find more innovation than Reform types would advocate, for example as those found in the research by Tolly Kizilos. Such suggestions range from scholarly proposals to reconstruct Orthodox liturgical life to less-than-well-informed proposals to reconstruct Orthodox polity based on the principles of American democracy or corporate practices.

Vrame concludes by saying:

Three types of orthopraxy are easily described. Adherents of the Ultraconservative/Fundamentalist type are prolific communicators: not only do they write books, but they also write letters to editors and statements; of late, they create web sites. Reform and Reconstructionist types are also fairly easily identifiable, although there are fewer adherents, and they are less prolific. But what of the middle ground, Traditional orthopraxy? Having described Traditional orthopraxy as a type of person or community that recognizes exactness (akribeia) but allows for human frailty (oikonomia) and is open to practices inherently organic to the living body of Christ and in relationship to the cultural environment in which the Church dwells—in this case, twenty-first century America—I suggest it as a bridge among all the types. Therefore, to explore its characteristics and depths further (as typified in the table presented in this essay) remains an essential task for Orthodox Christians in America.

SOURCE: Anton C. Vrame. "Four types of 'Orthodoxpraxy' among Orthodox Christians in America.

" in "Thinking Through Faith: New Perspectives from Orthodox Christian Scholars." Eds. Aristotle Papanikolaou and Elizabeth H. Prodromou. (New York: St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2008) 279-307.
 

Table that Vrame references in his conclusion. (Source is p292-293):

	Reconstructionist Orthopraxy	Reform Orthopraxy	Traditional Orthopraxy	UltraConservative Fundamentalist Orthopraxy
Texts and Interpretaton	Dynamic reading of texts, open to multiple sources and forms of interpretation, even patristic sources need interpretation. Texts not only need contextualization, but may also need rewriting.	Dynamic reading of texts, open to multiple sources and forms of interpretation, even patristic sources need interpretation. Texts need contextualization for interpretation.	Dynamic reading of texts, patristic interpretation valuable, but not only source. Texts need to be contextualized.	Literal read of Biblical, patristic and especially canonical texts. Only patristic and other Orthodoxy interpretation considered valuable.
Authority and Scripture	Democratic. Communities can and should make decisions for themselves. Individuals are free to act independently.	Hierarchical with strong elements of democracy. Clergy and laity have high degree of participation in governance and direction of Church life.	Hierarchical and conciliar, synergy. Clergy and laity under the leadership of hierarchy to determine future direction. A goal of the authorative relationship is for self-direction behaviour.	Rigid obedience to authority, very hierarchical. Permission from the geronta or spiritual father is needed for many decisions.
Liturgical Life	Argues for new forms and patterns of worship. Translation would be dynamic, but also permit for new texts for worship. New musical traditions would be expected to be developed, in new languages. Musical instruments or accompaniments would be acceptable. Architecture expected to adapt for new situations and environments, including experimentation with new forms. Seating in church (including in pews) seen as normal.	Follow the Typikon with more adaptation. Translation would be dynamic and more contextual to new social realities. Music would begin to adapt form original forms, in new languages. Musical instruments or accompaniments would be acceptable.  Architecture would replicate forms and adapt for new situations and environments, including experimentation with new forms. Seating would be seen as normal.	Follow the Typikon with some adaptation. Translation would be faithful to original text. Music would seek to replicate but could adapt, replicate original forms, even in new languages. No musical instruments or accompaniments, except to give pitches. Architecture would replicate forms and adapt for new situations and environments. Seating would be allowed.	Follow the Typikon exactly. Translation is literal. Music is in original forms, even in new languages. No musical instruments or accompaniments. Architecture would strive to replicate ancient forms. Seating in church is forbidden, except as an accommodation for a few elderly or sick persons. People may even sit on the floor during sermons.
Treatment of Women	Women on an equal footing with men. Advocate women's ordination to priesthood. Issues of ritual purity seen as anachronistic.	Women on equal footing with men. Advocate greater leadership roles for women, including ordination to the diaconate. Issues of Ritual purity seen as anachronistic.	Women are active in typical feminine roles, as caretakers, hostesses, and so forth. Women will be active in community, but not in roles held typically by men.	Women regulated to "second status." Matters of "ritual purity" would be followed exactly. Women gather on north side of nave. Advocates distinctive dress for women, especially for church attendance, such as head covering, long dress. Women's roles in church limited.
Piety	New forms must be created for "New World" realities.	"Old World" forms must adapt.	Faithful to "Old World" but willing to adapt to new realities.	Appears anachronistic in its adherence to forms from "Old World."
Ecumenism	Pro-Ecumenical, might advocate intercommunion of Christians now.	Pro-Ecumenical, with a positive view of outcome.	Pro-Ecumenical, with limitations on expectations.	Anti-Ecumenical, official contacts with other Christians should be avoided. Ecumenism is heresy.
Secular Knowledge	Very positive.	Positive	Generally positive, but with some reservation.	Negative. Children are homeschooled or in exclusively Orthodox schools.
Social Issues	Liberal as understood in US political life.	Moderate to liberal.	Moderate to conservative.	Conservative as understood in US political life.