ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE IN THE EASTERN CHURCHES

The Development of Doctrine and Practice is a Historically Observable Fact, Even in the Eastern Churches that Officially Deny It. Repentance and Return to the Ancient Forms are Necessary for Continued Fidelity to Christ, Simultaneously Rejecting the Authority of the So-Called "Continental Reformation" to Define This Process, Which Was Based On Philosophies and Categories of 15th and 16th Century Scholars, Dependent on Faulty Latin Translations and Incomplete Ancient Texts. Instead, a Process of Metanoia Within the Church is Needed to Return to the Most Authoritative Ancient Standards.

By Bp. Joseph (Ancient Church of the West)

Introduction 

The historical development of mysteriological tendencies within Eastern Orthodoxy represents a complex interplay of theological, liturgical, and socio-political factors, and is well documented by Orthodox scholars over the last 120 years. While all Christian scholars recognize that this has occurred, they vary as to whether or not they believe this development was good or necessary. This transformation, from the early Christian family-centered Passover Seder rituals to an elaborate imperial liturgy performed by celibate monastic clergy, reflects significant shifts in the Church's understanding and practice of holiness. This essay explores this evolution, drawing on Scripture, Patristic writings, historical analyses, and modern theological critiques, to argue for a return to the earliest Christian norms that emphasized communal participation and practical ministry. 

Early Christian Context and Jewish Roots 

The early Christian Eucharist was deeply rooted in Jewish Passover rituals and Barakoth prayers, which were family-centered and led by the head of the household. These practices were given new meaning by Jesus Christ during the Last Supper. Jesus' institution of the Eucharist during the Last Supper reinterpreted these Jewish rituals, establishing a new covenant centered on His sacrifice. This communal meal was initially simple and intimate, reflecting the familial and communal ethos of early Christian gatherings. Scriptural accounts highlight this transformation: "And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, 'This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.'" (Luke 22:19, ESV) and "And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, 'This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.'" (Luke 22:20, ESV). 

In the early Christian communities, the Eucharist was celebrated in the context of a full meal, often referred to as the "Agape feast" or "love feast." This meal reinforced the communal and familial bonds among believers. Tertullian, an early Church Father, describes these gatherings as occasions of joy and unity where the focus was on sharing both physical and spiritual nourishment. 

"Our feast explains itself by its name. The Greeks call it 'agape,' i.e. affection. Whatever it costs, our outlay in the name of piety is gain, since with the good things of the feast we benefit the needy. As it is with God Himself, a particular respect is shown to the lowly. If the object of our feast is good, in the light of an honorable motive, take notice how it admits of no vile or impure actions. We eat to satisfy our hunger in a manner which makes as much as drinking a duty as it is done with the craving for no more than enough. We eat as those who remember that we must pray to God even during the night; we speak as those who know that God is listening." (Tertullian, Apology 39)

Transition to Imperial Liturgy 

The informal and family-oriented celebration of the Eucharist is readily apparent from the first century of Church Fathers. St. Justin Martyr described the early Christian liturgy: "On the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read..." (First Apology, Chapter 67). 

As Christianity spread and became institutionalized, especially after Constantine's Edict of Milan in AD 313, the Eucharist evolved from a simple meal into a more formalized liturgy. The construction of church buildings (basilicas) facilitated larger communal gatherings, necessitating more structured and elaborate liturgical practices. The Council of Nicaea (AD 325) is a pivotal moment for this transformation. While the council did not directly address the liturgical changes, it marks a shift in the church's relationship with imperial power. The growing involvement of the emperor, beginning with Constantine's presence at the council, reflects a broader societal and liturgical shift. This transition becomes apparent is from the writings of Eusebius of Caesarea, particularly in his work "Life of Constantine" (Book 4). Here, Eusebius describes the emperor's participation in Christian worship, well before his baptism, his commissioning of grand basilica churches, and his role in promoting the Christian faith throughout the empire. Constantine's involvement in Christian liturgy signaled the beginning of a shift toward a more formal and ceremonial Eucharist, celebrated in grand settings rather than in house churches or small gatherings.

In Life of Constantine, Eusebius speaks of Constantine’s involvement in church services:

"And standing, as he used to do, in the midst of the assembly, and clad in raiment which became his person, he began with prayers addressed to God; and after these, as was the custom, delivered his exhortations to his subjects, speaking with his voice of authority and his calm dignity of manner."

It must be noted that this occurred before Constantine’s reception of Baptism. This, therefore, marks a large departure from the standards held in the Early Church, which only allowed leadership by the baptized faithful of the Church. This conservative approach is illustrated in the writings of St. Paul, the Didache, and the Didaskalia Apostolorum.

This imperial involvement transformed the Christian liturgy into an elaborate rite, as described by St. John Chrysostom in his Sermon on the Gospel of St. Matthew:  "When you see the Lord sacrificed, lying upon the altar, and the priest standing and praying over the victim... when you see the basilica resounding with the praises of the faithful, you must think you are no longer on earth but in heaven" (Homilies on Matthew, Homily 50). The Eucharist had clearly evolved into a more elaborate and imperial rite, with large congregations, ornate settings, and a role for the emperor or state representatives, which all reflected the glory of the "Ecumene" or the "Imperial Household."

The shift from home-based Eucharistic celebrations to basilica-based liturgies is vividly illustrated by the transition from the house churches of the first three centuries to the grand edifices like Hagia Sophia. The architecture of these churches reflected the increasing formalization and hierarchical structuring of the liturgy and of the Church itself, which provided a basis for civilizational culture, developed far beyond the family covenantal system exemplified by Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and Christ’s focus on His Twelve Disciples. 

The Earliest Depictions of Christ in the Catacombs is as a Beardless Shepherd Youth, Dating to the End of the 2nd Century

For Two Hundred Years, This Type of Youthful Greek Depiction Held Sway

Christ’s Social Status Gradually Increases in Depictions, Moving from Shepherd to Senatorial Class

At the End of the Fourth Century, Christ is Depicted as a Patriarchal Nobleman, Fully Bearded and Dressed in Imperial Robes, Becoming the Recognizable Icon Today

Celibate Clergy and Imperial Influence 

With the legalization and imperial endorsement of Christianity, the role of the clergy became increasingly formalized, leading to a growing emphasis on celibacy. This shift was not initially a purely Christian development but was influenced by earlier philosophical traditions, particularly Stoicism and Neoplatonism, where celibacy and asceticism were seen as paths to spiritual purity. While some scholars try to tie these developments to cultural exchange with the East, where Manichaeans and Buddhist also created monastic orders, we may point to the Essenes of the Dead Sea as a semi-monastic community amongst the Jews, who, while not strictly celibate, did practice elaborate purification rituals, and fast and pray for periods of time in as ascetic manner, preparing for the end of the world and the coming of a Messiah. All of these philosophies held that abstaining from bodily desires elevated the soul, bringing one closer to the divine. This attitude seems to complement St. Paul’s exhortation to celibacy for the service of the ministry, and in times of fasting and prayer amongst married Christians in the Book of First Corinthians. Thus, in early Christian thought, these ideas were synthesized into the belief that monastic celibacy made one "like the angels," transcending earthly concerns and devotions.

However, this justification overlooks an important biblical narrative: the fall of some angels precisely because they abandoned their proper roles and sought to become like humans (Jude 1:6). In this light, the insistence on celibacy might be seen not as a superabundance of grace but as a form of spiritual presumption. God created humans with a clear role and purpose: "It is not good that man should be alone" (Genesis 2:18) and "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the whole earth" (Genesis 1:28). The elevation of celibacy, then, could be interpreted as a rejection of this divinely ordained order, in which humans are meant to live in community, participate in family life, and contribute to the continuation of creation.

The defense of celibacy within the Christian tradition has often rested on Jesus' teaching that "in the resurrection, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven" (Matthew 22:30, ESV). Yet, this eschatological vision of the afterlife may not necessarily justify celibacy in the present, where humans still live within the temporal order and are called to fulfill their earthly roles. By striving to imitate the resurrected state prematurely, a state where the resurrected are explicitly recreated and functioning in a different role within the universe, there is a risk of misunderstanding the nature of humanity’s current vocation, which involves the sanctification of ordinary life, including marriage and family. This tension between the scriptural ideal of future glory and the practical responsibilities of earthly life has shaped Christian debates on celibacy for centuries.

Under the influence of a permanently celibate class, the liturgy became more elaborate, incorporating elements of imperial Roman ceremony, and taking up the tasks, time, and treasure that families might otherwise have directed towards practical survival. The emperor, representing Christ on earth, was paralleled by the bishop’s role in the liturgy, and Constantine called himself “Bishop of Bishops.” This shift in attitude also marked the exclusion of the laity from frequent communion and active participation, transforming them into spectators rather than active participants. The practice of reserving communion for special occasions, as opposed to the frequent communion of the early Church, is highlighted by the changes in the frequency of Eucharistic celebrations. In the early Church, it was common for believers to participate in the Eucharist daily or weekly, whereas by the Byzantine period, it became more common to receive communion only during major feasts or with other special preparation. 

Architectural and Liturgical Evolution 

Church architecture began to reflect both Old Testament (Temple) and New Testament (Synagogue) elements. The Roman Basilica's practical design was overlaid with symbolic elements reminiscent of the Jewish Temple’s sacramental functions. St. Germanus of Constantinople described the church as a microcosm of the universe: "The church is an earthly heaven in which the heavenly God dwells and moves." (On the Divine Liturgy, Chapter 1). The architectural evolution from simple house churches to grand basilicas with apses, naves, and iconostases symbolized the layers of holiness and the separation between the clergy and the laity. This mirrored the division between the Holy of Holies and the rest of the Temple in Jerusalem, the veil of which Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross tore and destroyed. 

The House Church at Dura Europos Shows a Creative Use of Domestic Space to Create a Purposeful Christian Communal Area

Justinian’s Hagia Sophia Shows the Grandest and Most Beautiful Christian Building Constructed for the Glory of God in Roman History, until the Renaissance and St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, Nearly a Thousand Years Later

Mystagogy and Liturgical Commentary 

Theodore of Mopsuestia emphasized the didactic and initiatory aspects of the liturgy, viewing it as a revelation of divine mysteries in a typological re-telling of the Gospel. St. Germanus of Constantinople interpreted the liturgy in deeply symbolic terms, relating it to the heavenly liturgy and the history of salvation. Nicholas Cabasilas focused on the mystical union with Christ through the sacraments, particularly the Eucharist. St. Symeon of Thessalonica provided detailed explanations of liturgical practices, reinforcing their mystical and hierarchical nature, excluding the “impure” laity and creating a system of mystical contemplation of the allegories within the liturgy, rather than participating in Communion itself. 

Shift from Practical Christianity to Mystical Theology 

Early Christianity emphasized practical ministry, charity, and community life, as reflected in the Epistle of James and early Christian writings: "So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead." (James 2:17, ESV). The early Christians were known for their charitable works and communal support, such as the distribution of goods to the needy as described in Acts 2:44-45: "All who believed were together and had all things in common; and they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need." This contrasts with later Byzantine practice, where monastic life and contemplative prayer were elevated above active charity, and consumed the culture and the surrounding state as primary benefactors of donations. This contrasts greatly with the Western practice of monasticism under the Benedictine model, where monastic communities became the primary producers and preservers of culture, agricultural products, and high-skilled artifacts for their respective nations. This shows that monasticism is neutral and that it can be employed to greatly differing ends, according to its underlying constitutional order. 

In the East, the development of Hesychasm and other mystical practices highlighted inner stillness and contemplative prayer, which became markers of holiness, typifying the increasing focus of the nation as a physical support for a more important spiritual endeavors. This shift paralleled a growing emphasis on mystical gnosis, Patristic scholasticism, and psychical experience over practical ministry. St. Gregory Palamas defended the Hesychast practice of inner prayer: "For through prayer, the mind descends into the heart, and there it finds the kingdom of heaven." (Triads, III.1.27). Inward focus, therefore, became a primary virtue. Hesychasm, as practiced by monastics on Mount Athos, emphasized silent prayer and contemplation, sometimes at the expense of active engagement with the surrounding community. This focus on inner experience marked a significant shift from the active missionary and charitable efforts of the early Church. 

Economic and Philosophical Criticisms 

Both historians George Ostrogorsky and Steven Runciman highlighted the economic pressures faced by the Byzantine Empire, including heavy taxation and the burden on the peasantry through the imperial state’s unlimited support of monasticism, thinking that supernatural protection of the state would be the natural outgrowth of state-sponsored prayers. Because wealthy men could place their estates beyond taxation by turning them into monasteries, and avoid military conscription by taking monastic oaths, all the while propagating their families unofficially through the taking of concubines rather than legal wives in official marriages, thus passing their wealth down to their heirs within a monastic veneer of piety, the ecclesiastical loopholes proliferated to the general disintegration of the Byzantine State. When they finally fell to the Turks, the Eastern Rum were not confused as to the sins God was judging within their culture. Ostrogorsky noted that the economic strain of false monasticism weakened the social fabric and the Empire's ability to sustain its military and administrative needs. The increasing concentration of land in the hands of monasteries and the aristocracy reduced the tax base and placed more pressure on small landholders, contributing to social unrest and weakened state finances. Rather than being strengthened by monastic prayers, Byzantine birthrates fell to record lows (some estimates say that the upper class had less than two children on average) and the nation weakened to an indefensible situation. 

Runciman discussed how the intertwining of religious and political power in the Byzantine Empire, particularly the control of the Church by the protected monastic class of leaders, led to decisions that prioritized spiritual concerns over pragmatic governance, impacting the state's ability to respond to external threats and internal challenges. The oft-touted idea of “Symphonia” thus had a negative aspect that modern Slavophiles and Orthodox Statists ignore. Ostrogorsky also recognized the demographic challenges faced by the Empire, including the impact of plagues and economic hardship that likely influenced family structures and population growth. Runciman explored how religious and social norms influenced by Orthodox Christianity, including the emphasis on asceticism and monasticism, might have affected societal attitudes towards marriage and family life, contributing to demographic challenges. 

Critiques from Modern Theologians and Call for Renewal 

In the modern day, Fr. John Meyendorff and Fr. Alexander Schmemann were prominent voices advocating for a renewal and revitalization of Orthodox ecclesiology and liturgical life, based upon the groundbreaking work of the Neopatristic Synthesis based in Paris at the St. Sergius Institute, led by Florovsky, Florensky, Lossky, and Bulgakov. They lightly critiqued the historical developments that led to the prioritization of monasticism over parish life, the exclusion of the laity from frequent communion, and the transformation of the liturgy into a contemplative mystery play. They argued for restoring the Eucharist to the center place of the gathered synaxis of the Faithful, emphasizing frequent communion for all baptized and chrismated Christians, seeing the Eucharist as central to Christian life. They called for active participation in liturgy, encouraging a more active and conscious participation of the laity in the liturgy, moving away from a purely contemplative experience. They also promoted a balanced ecclesiology, calling for a more balanced relationship between monastic and parish life, where both are valued and contribute to the life of the Church. Additionally, they advocated for greater involvement of the laity in church governance and spiritual life, countering the dominance of monastic control. 

Contrary to the Orthodox denial of doctrinal development, historical evidence shows significant evolution in liturgical and theological practices - from married men being the primary leaders of the Church, to celibate monks being the only men “holy enough” to hold episcopal power; from the normal practice of taking communion in crossed hands, to the use of the spoon; from remarriage after divorce being a sin worthy of excommunication, to it being a tolerated part of Church life; from elders being made priests and prohibited from ordination before the age of 30, to the common practice of ordaining young men as priests; from simple vestments that reflect the status of shepherds and pastors, to ornate imperial crowns that directly copy the headdress of Eastern Roman Emperors; from the Agape Feast taken in houses and celebrated with each person’s own cup of wine, distributed to the faithful to take home and commune later, to a highly controlled sacramental system where communion is fastidiously protected by a priestly class and used as an instrument of social control. The transformation from a family-based, communal worship to an imperial, clerical-centric liturgy represents a departure from early Christian norms, perhaps necessary, but an innovation nonetheless. The changes in liturgical practices can be seen in the evolution of the Divine Liturgy itself. The Liturgy of St. James, the earliest form of Christian Worship, was much simpler, linear, and more accessible, with the priests often turned toward the people, whereas the later Byzantine Rite of St. John Chrysostom became more and more elaborate and hierarchical, reflecting the growing influence of monasticism and imperial ceremony. 

There is a need for repentance and a return to the earliest Christian practices, at least in study and contemplation, with a stronger emphasis on communal participation, frequent communion, and practical pastoral ministry. Understanding this process of change does not necessitate an abandonment of monasticism, later liturgical traditions, or spiritualities that are more psychologically oriented - but context and perspective are always important, so that a proper focus on “First Things” and a commitment to the Gospel are always maintained. Bishops must lead as pastors and shepherds, not as wizards, judges and princes. Revitalizing the original communal and familial aspects of Christian worship can restore the balance between mystical contemplation and active ministry, aligning with the holistic Christian life envisioned by the early Church. 

Conclusion 

The historical development of mysteriological theology within Eastern Orthodoxy reveals a significant transformation from a Jewish family-centered ritual, spread by word-of-mouth, officiated by humble elders in ordinary homes to an elaborate, expensive, highly regulated imperial liturgy, controlled by a monastic class of experts far removed from daily life and requiring a huge economic investment to maintain, ultimately contributing to the fall of the Roman State. This shift has had profound implications for the Church's understanding and practice of holiness, especially in issues of formal claims of canonicity and legality, made by the former imperial centers of power, which fail to see that their claims are based upon untenable and harmful cultural innovations within Christianity that failed out of necessity. By returning to the earliest Christian norms, the Church can renew its emphasis on communal participation, practical ministry, and the holistic integration of mystical and active aspects of Christian life.

COLLECT 

Almighty and most merciful Father, who dost look with pity upon the manifold errors of Thy Church, we humbly beseech Thee to forgive the sin of the Development of Doctrine and the loss of the blessed simplicity which Thou didst bestow upon Thy holy Church in the beginning. Grant us grace to return to the purity of the Gospel, and to shun all vain disputations and needless complexities, which detract from the Holy Mystery of Thy ineffable Word and the practice of Holy Sacraments kept within the Church’s faithful succession, which is Holy Tradition, that we may evermore abide in Thy holiness and truth as revealed by Thy Spirit. Through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with Thee and the unity of the Holy Ghost, ever one God, world without end. Amen.