“American Orthodoxy” or “Orthodoxy in America”? 
Profiling the Next Generation of Eastern Christian Clergy in the USA

By Alexey D. Krindach

(Research associate at the Patriarch Athenagoras Orthodox Institute (Berkeley, CA) and faculty member at the Center of Geopolitical Studies of the Institute of Geography (Moscow, Russia): Akrindatch@aol.com, alkrin@online.ru)

“In the Orthodox Church, the priest is expected primarily to be a priest” (Harakas 1980, p.348)

I. Introduction

This study continues my previous work on the general subject of “Eastern Christian Churches in American Public and Religious Life” (Krindatch 2002, 2003). The study’s major goal is to examine the profile of the next generation of American Eastern Orthodox clergy. The goal of this study is to explore the similarities and differences between present-day American Orthodox parish clergy and their successors--seminary students. Finally, given the significance of and many controversies about the growing presence of Western Christian converts in American Orthodox churches, this study addresses the ways and the extent to which seminarians who are Orthodox-born (or “cradle Orthodox”) differ from their fellow students who are converts to Orthodoxy from Roman Catholicism and Protestantism.

II Eastern Orthodox Churches in the American Religious Landscape: the Challenges of Traditionalism

The important role of religion in American civic culture has been widely recognized since Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America (1835). In the post World War II period, Russell Kirk has emphasized the “religious character of the United States” in his famous work The American Cause (1956, 2002), arguing that “whether one subscribes to this religious faith or not, indisputably this is the religious framework upon which American society is built. Christian morality is the cement of American life; and Christian concepts of natural law, natural rights, and necessary limitations to human ambitions all govern our politics and even economic our economic system” (Kirk 2002, p.30).

More recently, since the 1980s, a new focus on civil society highlighted the “social” significance of religion in this country. It has become common, to consider religious participation as a gateway to other forms of civic engagement (Ammerman 1997; Wuthnow 1999), and as a major educator of civic skills for the lower classes and, in particular, the minorities. (Wald 1987, Verba 1995).

The challenging question to consider is: “To what extent do the Eastern Christian Churches in the US fit this current model of religious participation?” To answer this question, at least partially, several features of American Eastern Christianiny should be mentioned which distinguish it clearly from the Catholicism and Protestantism.

1) The Orthodox Church regards herself as the “Mother Church” of Christianity - the undivided church of the first nine centuries. It has a notion of Christianity that is “given” and independent of changing social or cultural realities. In the Orthodox Church, the unconditional standards of faith and ecclesiastical functions transcend personal and worldly considerations.

Strong adherence to a commonly held tradition, together with the network of established relations that creates the membership, are the chief means by which the Orthodox Church is perpetuated. These circumstances are basic to an understanding of any aspect of Orthodox Christianity, including:

a) the notion of the role of the clergy, and

b) the norms of parish life.

In the first case (clergy’s role), the Eastern Orthodox Church emphasizes the importance of the office of the priest who, to a large extent, is socially set apart from the congregation for special sacramental and worship functions.  That is the role of the priest itself which is more important than the individual in that role (Harakas 1980). In the second case (parish life), for many Orthodox priests to encourage diversity in membership, or to introduce novelty in ecclesial approach or ideas, is equal to challenging the very basis of unity and mutuality of the parish community.

2) The eucharistic and liturgical aspects of parochial (congregational) life have always been fundamental for Orthodox Christianity. In the context of American religious culture, however, they have become especially evident due to the very inhibited development of the social (non religious) aspects of life in the Eastern Orthodox parishes compared to the Roman Catholic and various Protestant Churches.

For a long period of time the American Orthodox Churches were not concerned with the social involvement of their clergy. Accordingly, counseling, social outreach and mission, and the development of community services - which are considered an important part of the clergy’s role in America – have been subtly disregarded or even discouraged in many Orthodox parishes in America. According to the national “Ministry in America” study, the Orthodox Church family identifies most completely with the so-called “sacramental-liturgical model” (Harakas 1980). In this model, clergy are called to a singular focus on the transcendent and the holy: on leading sacramental worship, providing communion, etc.

3) The Orthodox Churches officially hold to a closed communion. This means that for Orthodox clergy, there is a clear line of demarcation between Orthodox and non-Orthodox Christians, and an even greater separation between Orthodox Christianity and non-Christian religions. Socially, this does not involve total disengagement from or rejection of others. Yet sacramental relations with the non-Orthodox are strictly avoided, religiously mixed marriages are in many cases discouraged, and the ecumenical involvement of the Orthodox Churches in the USA operates primarily on an episcopal and denominational, but not on a local parish level.  

4) The Orthodox Churches as institutions have been historically shaped either by societies where Eastern Christians formed culturally and politically dominant majorities (Byzantine Empire, Russia, Romania, Georgia, etc.), or in contrast, in countries where Orthodox Christianity has served as a unifying and protecting bond for the particular ethno-religious minorities existing within alien and, frequently oppressive cultural and religious environments (for example, Copts in Egypt; Orthodox Syrians in the Middle East). 

Accordingly, in the USA, the most unusual challenge for the Orthodox Churches is necessity to respond to a situation of cultural pluralism in combination with conditions of a “free religious market”, for which Eastern Christianity has no historical precedent.

5) The notion of “one nation – one people – one Church” has also been historically characteristic of Eastern Christianity. Accordingly, the various Orthodox Churches from the “Old World” organized their independent jurisdictions (denominations) in America with the specific purpose of ministering to the religious needs of the corresponding immigrant ethnic communities (Armenians, Greeks, Russians, Serbs, etc.) and, later, their descendants. In the not so distant past, a high priority has been assigned to the preservation of members’ ethnic heritage and identity in the parishes of the various American Orthodox Churches.

Although American society is richly endowed with venues for cultural exchange and despite the fact that today a substantial proportion of their clergy and members are American-born, many Orthodox Churches in the USA are still markedly “ethnocentric” by nature (Krindatch 2003). Moreover, while various American Eastern Orthodox Churches share the same doctrine and they are in full sacramental communion with each other, these ethnically-based barriers separate them significantly. In other words, within American Orthodoxy, the “ethnic loyalty” prevails frequently over “Orthodox unity and solidarity.”

6) While many Orthodox parish priests are American-born, they, yet, can be seen as the bearers of ethnic identity and heritage in the Eastern Christian communities of the USA. For instance, in most American Orthodox Churches the proportion of clergy who were born in the USA is significantly higher than the number of priests who consider English their “mother” tongue or, whose primary identity is “simply American” (Table 1).

 Tab. 1

Abbreviations for various American Orthodox Churches:

1. OCA – Orthodox Church in America: Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania;

2. GOA – Greek Orthodox Archdiocese: Diocese of Pittsburgh;

3. Rus – Patriarchal parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church in the USA;

4. Ukr – Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA;

5. Alb – Albanian Archdiocese of the Orthodox Church in America;

6. Rom – Romanian Episcopate of the Orthodox Church in America;

7. Syr –  Syrian Orthodox Church of Antioch in the USA.

Source of data:

OCA and GOA – a survey of the parish clergy completed by author in the spring 2004;

Rus, Ukr, Alb, Rom, Syr – a survey of the parish clergy completed by author in the spring 2002, partly published in (Krindatch 2003).

The strong adherence to tradition and the inter-Orthodox ethnically-based divisions have contributed significantly to the fact, that - as of now - there has been no cohesive strategy on the part of the Orthodox Churches for adaptation to the American cultural diversity and religious pluralism and to continuing secularization understood, according to Jose Casanova, as an increasing  “functional differentiation and emancipation of the secular and religious spheres” (Casanova 1994).

This lack of an articulated and unified Orthodox response has led to the internal fragmentation of Eastern Christianity in America, not only on the denominational level of the different Orthodox churches (jurisdictions), but also on the level of their individual parishes (Krindatch 2003; Papanikolaou 2003).

Because of this growing parish-to-parish diversity, the role of the local Orthodox priests has become crucial for shaping the public image of Eastern Christianity in the USA. In other words, at the beginning of the third millennium, the actual church policies are being set not only by the national leadership of various American Orthodox churches, but also by the parish clergy to a greater extent than ever.

Investigating the issue of “‘American Orthodoxy’ or ‘Orthodoxy in America’” requires response to the two major questions: 1) Can one speak about fundamental and lasting influences of American culture on the practice and self-understanding of Orthodox Churches in the USA (“American Orthodoxy”)? or 2) Are the Orthodox churches still an estranged component of the American religious landscape in spite of their long historic presence in the USA (“Orthodoxy in America”)? 

Within this broad problem-setting, this study addresses a more specific question: Will the next generation of Orthodox clergy conform with the centuries-long and time-sanctified Orthodox traditions, or will they, rather, adapt (at least partially) to the standards of church life that are characteristic of American mainstream Christianity?”

III Procedures:

The major research procedure was a survey of all students enrolled in priestly formation M.Div. programs at St. Vladimir (Crestwood, NY) and St. Tikhon (South Canaan, PA) Orthodox seminaries, and at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology (Brookline, MA). The proportion of completed and returned questionnaires was 65% in the case of St. Vladimir, 95% in the case of Holy Cross and 100% in the case of St. Tikhon seminaries (Tab. 2).

 Tab. 2

(*) – in the case of St.Tikhon the survey has been completed among all (not only in M.Div. program) students

The survey questionnaire included 34 questions divided in three major categories:

A.     Personal backgrounds of students. Where are future priests coming from? In what types of families (religiously, socially) have they been raised? What social, educational and religious “baggage” do they bring with them into the seminary?

B.     The students’ general notion of Eastern Orthodox Christianity in the USA. How do the students perceive the current overall situation of Eastern Christianity in the context of the wider American society? What is their vision of the future of the Orthodox Churches in this country? What are their notions of the Orthodox social outreach and religious mission in the USA?

C.     The students’ vision of various aspects of the daily life in the American Orthodox parishes. How do they relate the worship to actual life? What do they think about the social involvement of Orthodox parishes in the local communities where the parishes are situated? What are their attitudes towards various forms of ecumenical participation and cooperation on the local level?  How will they deal with the various problems and issues associated with mixed (interfaith, inter-religious) marriages?

The three Orthodox seminaries (all are accredited members of the Association of Theological Schools in the United States and Canada) were established almost at the same time: in 1937-38. In the history of Eastern Christianity in the USA, it was a time when it became obvious that, for various reasons, American Orthodox churches cannot longer rely on a supply of “imported” clergy from overseas, and that US-born generations of Orthodox believers need clergy who are also raised, educated and ordained in the American social and cultural environments.

Having been founded originally with the same prime purpose – to educate and to train priests for Eastern Orthodox churches in America – with the passage of time, the three schools have developed different public images and educational approaches.

Holy Cross School of Theology is located in the southwestern suburbs of Boston metropolitan area. It is affiliated with the “Greek Orthodox Archdiocese in America” (GOA) – the largest by membership and perhaps most established of all American Orthodox Churches. For a long time, Holy Cross has been a stronghold of traditional Hellenic culture of the Greek-American community. In 1967, in addition to the seminary, Hellenic College was established as a liberal arts educational institution, to serve as the seminary’s secular counterpart.

St. Vladimir Orthodox Theological Seminary is located in the northern suburbs of the New York City metropolitan area. It is affiliated with the “Orthodox Church in America” (OCA) - the former North American Metropolia of the Russian Orthodox Church. St. Vladimir has always been “internationally, ecumenically and research” oriented. It is also known for the ecumenical involvement of the faculty members, and for several outstanding Orthodox scholars who have worked in the seminary (Fr. Georges Florovsky, Fr. John Meyendorff, Fr. Alexander Schmemann). Side by side with the educational functions, St. Vladimir serves as a base for the reputable publishing house “St. Vladimir Seminary Press,” which has produced hundreds of books and periodicals in Orthodox theology.

Unlike Holy Cross and St. Vladimir, St. Tikhon Orthodox Theological Seminary (also affiliated with the Orthodox Church in America) is situated in a rather remote rural area of Northeast Pennsylvania. It is located on the territory of St. Tikhon Monastery – the oldest Orthodox monastic community in America (founded in 1905). The original concept of St. Tikhon seminary was to be, first and foremost, a “pastoral school.” Accordingly, St. Tikhon’s educational programs have always been  oriented to the formation of clergy for practical work in Orthodox parishes, rather than as theologians or scholars of religion. Because of its close association with the monastic community, St. Tikhon attracts students who are especially devoted to the more traditional aspects of Orthodox worship and liturgical practices. Among the three seminaries, St. Tikhon has a reputation as the most conservative of these schools.

By completion of the survey among students of all three Orthodox theological schools, we have hoped to reflect adequately the actual internal diversity of Orthodox Christianity in America.

Among the questions which we attempted to examine were: Whether future Orthodox priests – current seminary students – can be seen as a homogenous group of people who have similar personal backgrounds, share the same values, demonstrate similar approaches to the various Church issues and the norms of parish life? Or, on the contrast, are they rather dissimilar among themselves? And, if “yes,” which issues, and to what extent, separate them from each other? In this context special attention has been paid to the differences between the Orthodox-born (“cradle Orthodox”) seminarians and the converts students – the former Roman Catholics and Protestants.

Simultaneously with this students’ study the survey of the Orthodox priests serving in the parishes of the Diocese of Pittsburgh – which is a part of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese (GOA) - and of the Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania - which is a part of the Orthodox Church in America (OCA) - has also been completed. All items from the students questionnaires have been included into the clergy survey. Accordingly, this study aimed also at responding the following questions:  Whether future Orthodox priests - the students participating in this survey - are similar or rather dissimilar to current parish clergy? How large is the “generation gap”? In which areas, and with regard to which issues, are the differences especially pronounced?

IV. Major Findings (The text below presents selected and generalized results. A full study report is available upon request from the author).

1) The results of the survey revealed that the “old stereotypes” about various public images of the three major American Orthodox seminaries are still largely accurate.

As measured by the church affiliation of the students, St. Vladimir is the most diverse of the three seminaries. Less than half of St. Vladimir students belong to the Orthodox Church in America, with which St. Vladimir seminary is affiliated. In other words, St. Vladimir serves as a major study facility for the clergy of the various American Eastern Christian Churches which do not have their own full-fledged educational institutions. In comparison with two other seminaries, the students at St. Vladimir demonstrate more liberal and modern approaches to the different aspects of Church life. They, for example, are more inclined to explore new ways of delivering Orthodox sermons (by using examples from the contemporary mass-media or personal stories or first-hand experiences), and to participate in ecumenical worship or in inter-Christian joint social service projects. They have more tolerant attitudes towards religiously mixed inter-Christian marriages (Orthodox with Roman Catholics or Protestants). In their evaluation of the various sources of authority in parish life the St. Vladimir seminarians have greater appreciation for “human reason and understanding” and lesser acceptance of the “guidance of the ruling bishop” as an unquestioned source of authority.  

The Holy Cross School of Theology remains by and large a very “Greek” institution. 86% of its students are members of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North America. It is also in the Holy Cross seminary that ethnic culture and ethnic identity remain important for a much larger part of the students than in St. Tikhon or in St. Vladimir.

For instance, while 90 % of the Holy Cross’ seminarians have been born in the USA, only 72 % of them consider English to be their first “Mother” language, and only 18 % of them say that their primary identity is “I am simply American.”  

In comparison with St. Vladimir and Holy Cross, the St. Tikhon students are most conservative in their approaches to various Church practices and issues. They are, for instance, rather reluctant to accept various forms of ecumenical relations with the non-Orthodox Christian Churches (and not only joint ecumenical worship, but also participation of the Orthodox churches in the joint inter-Christian social service projects and in the local councils of Christian churches). 43 % of St. Tikhon seminarians reject the idea of mixed inter-Christian marriages in comparison with 30 % of Holy Cross and 17% of St. Vladimir students. 84% of St. Tikhon seminarians demonstrate an unconditional obedience to the ruling bishop’s guidance (as compared to 57-60 % in case of St. Vladimir and Holy Cross), while only 22% of them consider “human reason and understanding” an important source of authority in the life of the Orthodox parishes (in comparison with 28 % of Holy Cross and 38 % of St. Vladimir students). In their assessment of the various ways of delivering Orthodox sermons, the St. Tikhon seminarians focus primarily on the “references to and detailed explanations of scriptures and doctrine,” but they largely ignore the possibility of using “examples from contemporary mass-media” or “personal stories and first hand experiences” in the sermons.   

2) The new developments of the 1980s-90s have added some new features to the collective portraits of students in each seminary.  

While they are most traditional and conservative in their attitudes to the various norms of the daily Church life, the St. Tikhon seminarians are, at the same time, most optimistic about the future of the Orthodox Christianity in America. 80% of them predict the further growth in numbers and proportion of Orthodox Christians in the United States (in comparison with 54-56% of the St. Vladimir’s and Holy Cross students). Almost half of St. Tikhon seminarians believe in the imminent institutional independence of American Orthodox churches from the Mother Churches in the Old World or even in the formation of one united American Orthodox Church (only 19 % of Holy Cross and 30% of St. Vladimir students share this opinion). Finally, to a larger extent than students at St. Vladimir and, especially, at Holy Cross seminaries, the St. Tikhon seminarians foresee an increasing role of converts in American Orthodoxy: almost quarter of St. Tikhon students even think that the converts to Orthodoxy from the Roman Catholic and Protetstant Churches will be the major source of the further growth of Orthodox Christianity in America.

In brief, St. Tikhon seminarians believe in bright prospect for Eastern Christianity and the Orthodox churches in America, which will yet be achieved by retaining norms of religious and social life that are most traditional for Orthodox Christianity. 

Quite differently from St. Tikhon, the St. Vladimir students associate the future of Eastern Christianity in the United States with acceptance and integration into the Orthodox churches the standards of religious life which are typical for the mainstream American Christianity. In comparison with St. Tikhon, the St. Vladimir students appear to be consistent proponents of the various forms of ecumenical involvement with non-Orthodox Christian Churches, of the introduction of new subjects and ways of delivering Orthodox sermon, etc.  

In other words, adaptation to the realities of American cultural and religious pluralism is seen by St. Vladimir students as a necessary condition for the success of the Orthodox Christian mission in America. 

Interestingly enough, although the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese is most established of all American Orthodox Churches, the Holy Cross students (who are mainly the members of GOA) are the most skeptical in their estimation of the current level of integration of the Orthodox churches into the wider American society. In comparison with St. Vladimir and, especially, St. Tikhon, a bigger proportion of Holy Cross students are of the view that “in spite of their long historical presence in the USA, the Orthodox churches are and will remain “strangers” to American society.” To a lesser degree than St. Vladimir and St. Tikhon seminarians, the Holy Cross students believe in the possibility of the institutional independence of the various Orthodox Churches in the USA from their headquarters in the Old World, and in the formation of one unified American Orthodox Church.

Finally, in comparison with the two other seminaries, the Holy Cross students identify more strongly with the model in which the “Orthodox Church is for Orthodox-born people.” However, this traditional notion of Orthodox Christianity in America does not exclude rather tolerant attitudes of the Holy Cross students to various innovations in the parish life. In fact, in most cases, Holy Cross seminarians share the liberal views expressed by St. Vladimir students with regard to the questions of ecumenical involvement and of the new subjects and ways of delivering sermons and of mixed inter-Christian marriages, etc.

3)  In the 1980-90s, it has become common to speak about an increasing number of converts – the former Roman Catholics and Protestants - in the American Orthodox churches. Our survey has confirmed this thesis: about half of the students in the three major American Orthodox theological schools are converts.

Although their proportion varies from seminary to seminary, even at Holy Cross - a stronghold of Hellenic Orthodox culture - converts comprise 25% of the student body. As for St. Tikhon and St. Vladimir seminaries, the converts constitute an absolute majority of their students. This is an entirely new situation that has never before occurred in the history of Eastern Christianity in America.

Given the theological and liturgical similarities between the Eastern Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Churches, one can expect that Catholics would comprise most significant group among the convert students. According to several studies completed in the past by the Orthodox scholars this was the case in the 1970s and early 1980s [Loft, 1984]. Today, however, at St. Vladimir and St. Tikhon seminaries, more than three quarters of converts are former Protestants - a proportion which is higher than that of Protestants in the overall Christian population in the United States. In the Holy Cross seminary, only 8% of all converts are former Catholics (Tab. 3).

Tab. 3 What was your religion/Church before you have become an Orthodox Christian (% of respondents)?

 The rapidly-growing presence of former Catholics and Protestants in American Orthodox seminaries is important in light of the ongoing discussion about “who are the converts to Orthodoxy in the United States?” In this discourse, one group of Orthodox scholars provides various arguments for what makes Orthodox Christianity and the Orthodox Church attractive for increasing numbers of Americans. Representatives of the other group, however, argue that converts to Eastern Christianity are predominantly the persons who - for various reasons - no longer identify themselves with the mainstream of American society. They emphasize the fact that for most American converts, the Orthodox Church is seen as the last “security blanket,” according to the definition of Fr. Emmanuel Clapsis, Holy Cross seminary’s dean.

Hence, depending on which of two approaches is more accurate, the growing proportion of converts among future Orthodox clergy will lead either to the “Americanization” of the Orthodox churches and to their fuller integration with the wider American society, or, to the contrary, it will contribute to the further separation of Orthodoxy from mainstream Christianity in the United States.

For the internal lives of the American Orthodox Churches the growing presence of converts among future Orthodox priests also raises numerous challenging questions. Is this a short-lived phenomenon, or will this be a prevailing trend in the long-term perspective? Does this situation mean that in 10-15 years the number of converts among parish clergy will be equal to the number of “cradle-Orthodox” priests? Or, perhaps, will the converts even dominate?  To what extent does the widespread notion that Catholic and Protestant converts tend to be “more Orthodox” than people born and raised in the Orthodox religious tradition reflect the truth? How will the priests who are the converts organize the lives of their parishes, which will be, perhaps, still mainly populated by the Orthodox-born parishioners?

4) The differences in the personal backgrounds of the Orthodox-born seminarians and their fellow convert students (such as the level of their secular education, occupations of parents, incomes of the parental households, strictness of religious upbringing, etc.) are minor. The major dividing line in this context is not between the Orthodox-born and the converts, but between former Evangelical Protestants and all other students.

In comparison with cradle-Orthodox or former Catholics or former Moderate Protestants, the converts from Evangelical Protestant churches tend to come from much wealthier families,  and their fathers more likely belonged to the business community. They also received a higher level of secular education before enrollment into the Orthodox seminary. But it is the strictness of the religious upbringing provided by parents which especially separates former Evangelical Protestants from the other seminary students. Indeed, almost all converts from the Evangelical Protestant churches were brought up in families where parents “were active in the church and we attended church regularly,” but only 75% of the Orthodox-born and former Catholics, and less than two thirds of the former Moderate Protestants, were raised in such pious homes. Finally, the former Evangelical Protestants are more definite in their plans to be ordained and to serve as priests after graduation from the seminary than all other students are.

5) Orthodox-born and convert students expressed very similar views on what must be emphasized in worship practices in an Orthodox parish.

By the assessment of various possible themes for their future sermons, convert students tend to conform entirely to their Orthodox-born colleagues. Most traditional Orthodox Church sermon topics - “explanation of Gospel and Scripture,” “personal spiritual growth,” and “personal salvation,” - were chosen by all groups of students as by far the most important. On the contrary, not only the cradle-Orthodox, but also the converts, demonstrated reluctance to address in the church the more “utilitarian” subjects, such as “stewardship of time and money for church,” or “social and political issues in your parish area,” or “social and political issues in the USA.”

As to students’ opinion on how to reach out and attract new members, the survey has shown that convert students are again more willing to accept the ways which have always been traditional for the Orthodox parishes (cultural events and popular programs, efforts to identify new Orthodox immigrants who recently settled in the area), rather than use methods which are more typical for American Western Christian churches (advertisements in local newspapers, direct mail to the homes of all area residents).

6) The Orthodox-born and convert students also show remarkable similarities in their vision of the religious mission and social outreach of Orthodox churches in the United States.

A vast majority of seminarians (71-92%) feel that “American Orthodox churches should try to be as active in their missionary efforts and social work as other Christian churches.” Only an insignificant minority of cradle-Orthodox (10 %) are of the view that the religious mission of the Orthodox churches in the United States will be unsuccessful because “the Eastern Orthodox religious tradition has little appeal to American society at large.” An even smaller group of Orthodox-born students (7%) believes that Orthodox churches should serve primarily the “needs of their own flocks,” or that “active Church-based social work has never been a part of the Eastern Christian Orthodox religious tradition.”

In other words, the forthcoming generation of Orthodox clergy - both Orthodox-born and convert students - appears to be eager to change the current situation, in which American Orthodox parishes are in general much less involved in social outreach and mission work than Catholic parishes and Protestant congregations (Tab. 4).

Tab. 4 Most Christian Churches in America pay great attention both to the active missionary work and to various Church-based social, educational, charity programs. What must be the position of the American Orthodox Churches with regard to these type of activities (% of respondents)?

7) Distinctions between Orthodox-born and convert students are much more pronounced in how they perceive the current situation of, and what future they predict for the Eastern Christian churches in America.

In their assessment of the present situation of Orthodox Christianity in the United States, a prevailing majority (57-64 %) of former Catholics and Protestants think that “While most of their members are socially integrated into American society, the Orthodox Churches as institutions are still perceived by the vast majority of Americans as ‘immigrant communities’.” On this issue, Orthodox-born students have less agreement among themselves. The share of the seminarians who espouse a pessimistic view that “In spite of their long historical presence in the United States, the Orthodox churches still are and will remain ‘strangers’ to American society” is essentially higher among the cradle-Orthodox (28 %) than among former Catholics (17 %) or Moderate (22 %) or Evangelical (14 %) Protestants (Tab. 5).

 Tab. 5 How would you define the overall current situation of various Orthodox Churches in USA in the context of the American “religious establishment”  and in the wider American society in general (% of respondents)?

The converts are more optimistic than the Orthodox-born in their belief that the Eastern Orthodox churches in the United States will become independent from the Mother Churches overseas or that they will even form a united American Orthodox Church in the foreseeable future.

This is an opinion which is shared by 33 % of former Moderate Protestants, 41 % of former Catholics and 43 % of former Evangelical Christians in comparison to only 17 % of the Orthodox-born seminarians who hold this position. On the contrary, only among Orthodox-born there is a relatively significant group of students (13 %) who insist that keeping linkages with the Mother Churches in the Old World is vitally important for the American Orthodox churches, in order to resist the pressure of a dominant Protestant culture (Tab. 6).

Tab. 6 Today the Orthodox Christianity in America consists of numerous Church’ “jurisdictions” and most of them are still linked and subordinated to the “Mother” Churches in the “Old World”. In your personal opinion, are any changes in this situation desirable and realistic during next 10-20 years (% of respondents)?

Finally, the former Protestants are also more enthusiastic about the continuing influx of American converts into the American Orthodox churches. For instance, 29 % of former Evangelical Protestants and 43 % of former Moderate Protestants believe that the future development of Eastern Christianity in America will depend primarily on converts from the non-Orthodox Christian churches as compared to none of the former Roman Catholics, and only 7 % of the Orthodox-born.  

8) The most clear distinctions between cradle-Orthodox seminarians and the students who come from Catholic and Protestant families are, however, in their visions of various Orthodox church policies and regulations.

This survey has largely confirmed the widespread notion that Protestant and Catholic converts tend to be “more Orthodox” than persons who were born and raised in the Orthodox Church. Indeed, former Protestant and Catholic convert students demonstrated more conservative and traditionalist attitudes towards such issues as sources of authority in parish life, ecumenical worship, religiously mixed marriages, etc.

While the convert students are more willing than the Orthodox-born to accept the unquestionable authority of the ruling bishop, a greater proportion of the cradle-Orthodox seminarians than of the former Catholics and Protestants have expressed the view that “human reason and understanding” are also very important sources of authority in parish life (Tab. 7A and 7B).

Tab 7 How important must be the following sources of authority in the worship and daily life of the American Orthodox parishes (% of respondents):

A. Guidance of the ruling Bishop

B. Human reason and understanding

 The idea of the “joint ecumenical prayer” - something which is very common for the mainstream Protestant Christianity in this country - has been rejected by the former Protestant students (especially former Evangelical Christians) to a much larger degree than by the cradle-Orthodox and former Catholic seminarians.

Tab. 8 What is your personal opinion about appropriateness of joint ecumenical prayer/services of the Orthodox and the other Christian Churches in America (% of respondents):

The relative “liberalism” of the Orthodox-born students, and more conservative attitudes of convert seminarians are especially apparent in their different approaches to the inter-Christian (Orthodox - non-Orthodox) marriages. Only one fifth of Orthodox-born students hold the position that the parish priest must either “not give his blessing for such a marriage,” or that he “should try to discourage this marriage to the extent possible.” In the case of converts, however, more than a third of former Catholics and Moderate Protestants, and more than half of former Evangelical Christians have expressed their disapproval of inter-Christian marriages (Tab. 9).

Tab. 9 Various Orthodox Churches in America demonstrate de-facto various policies/practices with regard to the issue of the inter-Christian “Orthodox – Non-Orthodox” marriages. What in your personal opinion should be the position of the Orthodox priest with regard to such “mixed” marriages (Orthodox with Protestant or Catholic)? Please, select one answer only which seems most appropriate (% of respondents).

 9) What distinguishes clearly current clergy of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese (GOA) and of the Orthodox Church in America (OCA) from their successors - today’s GOA and OCA seminary students - are the very different geographic origins (in case of the GOA) and religious “roots” (in case of the OCA) of “fathers” and “sons.”

Indeed, about half GOA priests are immigrants from overseas, but almost all seminary students - the members of the GOA - are US-born. At the same time, a dominant majority of both present GOA clergy (91 %) and GOA seminary students (70 %) have been raised by Orthodox parents and in the Orthodox Church. One also should notice that GOA “fathers” and “sons” share in common a rather strong awareness of their ethnic roots. For example, both among GOA clergy and among GOA seminarians there exists a significant difference between the proportion of persons born in America and the share of those who consider English their first Mother language. Similarly, for both GOA clergy and GOA students the fact of birth in America does not imply necessarily the feeling of being “simply American” (Tab. 10)

Tab. 10

On the contrary, in the case of the OCA, both the “fathers” and the “sons” are mainly US-born persons who consider English their Mother-tongue. Also, among OCA clergy and OCA students, the proportion of America-born persons correspond to a much greater degree with the share of those who identified themselves as “simply American.”

At the same time, the very distinct religious upbringing divide two generations of the OCA clergy rather strongly. While three out of four current OCA priests (72%) are cradle-Orthodox, two out of three OCA seminary students (66 %) are converts to Orthodoxy from the Roman Catholic and the Protestant churches (Tab. 11).

Tab. 11 What was your religion/Church before you have become an Orthodox Christian?

10) Two Orthodox Churches involved in this study – the “Orthodox Church in America” (OCA) and the “Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North America” (GOA) – are historically the most established and by far the largest of all American Eastern Christian Churches. The comparative analysis of their current parish clergy and their seminary students has shown: today, GOA and OCA demonstrate a very different pattern of a “generation-to-generation” transition.

As noticed, the GOA is still to an essential degree an ethnically based “Greek” Church. At the same time,  it continues to experience an increasing “Americanization” – the process which is based on the gradual replacement of the older immigrant clergy from Greece, Turkey and the Middle East by the US-born next generation of priests. It should be pointed out, however: this “Americanization” trend develops primarily on the basis of GOA internal demographic potential. Indeed, three out of four GOA seminary students are Orthodox-born and two out of three maintain their ethnic identity and an awareness of their Greek ancestry.  

In the case of the OCA, today’s clergy have been mainly born in the USA and they consider themselves “simply Americans.” It appears, however, that in the near future, OCA priesthood will undergo two rather different (if not contradictory) developments.  

On the one hand, one can predict a certain return of the OCA to its original Slavic ethnic roots and character, because of the modestly growing proportion of new immigrants from Eastern Europe among future priests – present seminary students (new immigrants constitute 14 % of OCA seminarians in comparison with only 4% of current clergy). On the other hand, converts from the Roman Catholic and various Protestant Churches constitute two thirds of the OCA seminarians. Accordingly, the converts may eventually form a majority of the OCA clergy, if this phenomenon (the dominance of converts among the OCA seminary students) becomes a steady and long lasting tendency.

11) In spite of these pronounced differences in origins between the current Orthodox priests and today’s seminary students, the latter remain basically loyal to the previously mentioned “sacramental-liturgical model” of life in the American Orthodox parishes.

They assign, for example, much lesser importance, to the social practices (“being responsible member of the local community,” “donating time for social and charity work,” “being a good citizen”) than to the religious functions of a parish (“personal daily prayer,” “regular reading of Bible,” “regular receiving of the sacraments).

A majority of GOA and OCA students are also reluctant to “blend” worldly issues and subjects into their sermons (such as “social and political issues in the area of a parish,” “social and political issues in the USA”), and they focus primarily on the most traditional - for the Orthodox Church - topics of sermons: explanation of the Scriptures, and themes of personal spiritual growth and salvation (Tab. 12).

Tab. 12 Which of the following should be the most important and frequent topics of sermons in Orthodox parishes in America (% of respondents which have indicated the subjects below as “important”)?

Hence, while there are, indeed, some significant distinctions between the “fathers” and the “sons,” both generations reject largely the idea to use the Church space for addressing various social non-religious issues. The data in the table below demonstrate that in this context the Orthodox Churches in the USA are and, perhaps, will remain very different from the American mainstream Protestant Christianity. 

Tab. 13 How often does your sermon focus on social action and social justice (%  of respondents) (*):

Columns 1-4: - the data from the national  “Faith Communities Today” study (www.fact.hartsem.edu)

1 – USA Christian churches all together; 2 – Liberal Protestant denominations; 3 – Moderate Protestant denominations; 4 – Evangelical Protestant denominations.

Columns 5-10: - the data of the national survey of the clergy of six Orthodox jurisdictions completed by author in spring of 2002 (the selected results are available at www.hirr.hartsem.edu/research/research_orthodoxindex.html)

5 – Patriarchal parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church; 6 - Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA; 7 – Albanian Diocese of the Orthodox Church in America; 8 – Romanian Episcopate of the Orthodox Church in America; 9 – Diocese of Alaska of the Orthodox Church in America; 10 – Syrian Orthodox Church of the Antioch.

Columns 11-14:  - the data from author’s surveys completed in spring of 2004.

11 – clergy of Greek Orthodox Archdiocese; 12 – seminary students of Greek Orthodox Archdiocese; 13 – clergy of Orthodox Church in America; 14 – seminary students of Orthodox Church in America.  

(*) -  this question was asked as one question in the survey of the FACT study (columns 1-4: “How often does the sermon in your worship focus on social action and social justice?”), but it was divided in two questions in author’s surveys (columns 5-14: “How often does your sermon focus on social issues in the area of your parish?” and “...on social issues in the USA in generally?”)

n/a – in the students survey the question was worded as “Which of the following should be the most important and frequent topics of sermons in American Orthodox parishes?” Therefore the data in the table show the proportion of students who selected the subject as “important,” but in the students’ survey there was no provision for choosing between “often” and “seldom.” 

 12) The investigation of student and clergy opinions on the difficult issue of inter-Christian (Orthodox with Catholics or Protestants) marriages in American Orthodox parishes revealed an intriguing fact: the current priests demonstrate more tolerant attitudes towards mixed couples than the generation of “sons” – the GOA and OCA seminarians.

Two out of three current GOA and OCA clergy hold a liberal position, which is yet within church guidelines: “I see no problem with this situation, although I will encourage the “Non-Orthodox” party to join the Orthodox Church in the future. Also, I will insist that the wedding ceremony must be in the Orthodox Church,”  but only a minority (31-48%) of the seminarians share the same view. Furthermore, one out of ten of GOA and OCA priests is willing to accept inter-Christian marriages in his parish as a matter of fact and unconditionally: “I see no any problem with mixed marriages in my parish, because they are very common in American society in general. I will not insist on the wedding ceremony in the Orthodox Church.”  This liberal position is virtually non-existent among the GOA and OCA students.

On the contrary, only among seminarians does there exist a rather conservative group which simply denies the possibility of inter-Christian marriages by saying  “I will not give my blessing for such a marriage to a member of my parish unless the other party first converts to Orthodoxy” (Tab. 14).

Tab. 14 Various Orthodox Churches in America have various policies with regard to the inter-Christian “Orthodox – Non-Orthodox” marriages. What is your personal position with regard to such mixed marriages?

 This phenomenon - liberalism of “fathers” and conservatism of “sons” in approaching the question of the inter-Christian couples - requires further examination and explanation “why?” It cannot be ascribed simply to the fact that there are more converts (who are inclined to reject religiously mixed marriages) among the “sons” than among the “fathers,” because both the OCA students (who are predominantly converts) and the GOA seminarians (who are mainly cradle Orthodox) expressed very similar opinions on this issue. 

Hence, does conservatism of “sons” reflect some general trend in the wider American society? Or does liberalism of “fathers” results from their common sense and from their professional experiences of the actual work in the parishes?

13) A feature which divides essentially all American Christian churches and serves as an important criteria in making a decision on “which church to belong to” is the strictness of internal rules and regulations within the congregation or parish.

The national “Faith Communities Today” study has shown that the proportion of congregations/parishes where there are “clear expectations for the members that are strictly enforced” vary significantly between the Roman Catholic, and the Liberal, Moderate and Evangelical Protestant Churches (Tab. 15). 

Tab. 15

Source of data: “Faith Communities Today” national study completed by Hartford Institute for Religion Research. The results available at www.fact.hartsem.edu

 My earlier study of six minor Orthodox jurisdictions in America as well as the recent survey of the GOA and OCA parish clergy discovered that in the overall picture the American Orthodox churches have a higher level of internal requirements for their members than is the case of their Western Christian counterparts (Tab. 16).

Tab. 16

Source of data: a national survey of the parish of the six American Orthodox churches completed by Alexey D. Krindatch in spring of 2002. The selected results are available at http://www.hirr.hartsem.edu/research/research_orthodoxindex.html

Tab. 17

 14) This study aimed also at examining the question “What type of differences in American Orthodox Churches are more pronounced: those which are based on Church-to-Church differentiation or those which result from generation-to-generation distinctions?”

In other words, do the attitudes and approaches, which are shared in common by the next US-born generation of the Orthodox clergy – current seminary students, prevail over “loyalties” to their own church’s traditions (either “Greek Archdiocese” or “Orthodox Church in America”) or rather vice versa?   We have found, that some issues unify “fathers” and “sons” within each Church (and separate GOA from OCA), while the others, on the contrary, serve mainly as divisive lines between two generations.

The first tendency, for instance, has been exemplified by the much larger importance of ethnic identity that both GOA students and clergy share in common, or by their greater devotion to the ecumenical involvement (in comparison with OCA seminarians and priests), or by the greater keenness of OCA clergy and students on the idea of the independence of American Orthodoxy from the Mother Churches overseas. At the same time, for example, the approaches to inter-Christian couples (surprisingly greater tolerance of “fathers” in comparison with “sons”) or the issue of the strictness of internal regulations in an Orthodox parish (lower level of expectations demonstrated by the “sons”) evidence the existence of generation-to-generation distinctions which are as significant as the current differences between the clergy of various American Orthodox Churches.

V. Conclusions

The answer on the very question raised in this study - “American Orthodoxy” or “Orthodoxy in America” – is simple: both, “American Orthodoxy” and “Orthodoxy in America.”

In other words,  the proponents of the fuller integration of the Orthodox Churches with the mainstream American religious culture and, on the contrary, the advocates of the immutability of the Orthodox Christianity, who believe in the independence of the Orthodox religious and social practices from the specific conditions of American society are equally present in the generation of “fathers” (current parochial priests) and among the “sons” (today’s seminary students). There is also no reason to predict an “Americanization” of the Orthodox churches in the United States because of an increasing presence of converts – the former Catholics and Protestants - among the future Orthodox parish clergy. As seen from the survey’s data, not only do the convert seminarians implicitly accept Orthodox traditions and worship practices, but, in many instances, they demonstrate more traditional and conservative approaches to the various norms of Church life than cradle-Orthodox students.

The results of the study suggest that the diversity in approaches to the various church policies and issues demonstrated by today’s parish clergy will be augmented in the future by the differences between generations of “fathers” and “sons,” as well as by the disagreements on many questions which divide the “sons” - the seminary students - themselves. The increasing presence of former Roman Catholics and Protestants among the future Orthodox priests also contributes significantly to the internal divisions within American Orthodoxy.  

Hence, the process of internal fragmentation of Eastern Christianity in America which was mentioned on the first pages of this report appears to be a steady trend which will most likely gather its strength in the near future.

References:

Ammerman, N. 1997. Organized religion in a voluntaristic society. In “Sociology of Religion”, 58:203-215.

Casanova, J. 1994. Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press. P.19

Harakas, S. 1980. Orthodox Church. In “Ministry in America. A Report and Analysis, Based on an In-Depth Survey of 47 Denominations in the United States and Canada.” Ed. by D.Schuller and M.Strommen. San Francisco: Harper and Row Publishers.

Jones, D., Doty S., at al, Eds. 2002. Religious Congregations and Membership in the United States 2000. Nashville, Tennesee: Glenmary Research Center.

Kirk, R. 2002 (3rd edition). The American cause. Wilmington, Delaware: ISI books.

Krindatch, A. D. 2002. Orthodox (Eastern Christian) Churches in the United States at the beginning of a new millennium: Questions of nature, identity and mission. In “Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion”, 41(3):533-563.

Krindatch, A.D. 2003. Eastern Christianity in North American Religious Landscape: Ethnic Traditionalism versus Civic Involvement and Social Transformations. Published at web-site of Hartford Institute for Religion Research at: http://www.hirr.hartsem.edu/research/research_orthodoxindex.html

Loft, S. 1984. A report on a survey of converts: very recent converts (1978-1983). The Orthodox Church in America: Sysosset, New York, 1984. 

Papanikolaou, A. 2003. “The One Becomes Many: Orthodox Christianity and American Pluralism”. A paper presented at the workshop “Orthodox Christianity in American Public Life: The Challenges and Opportunities of Religious Pluralism in the 21st Century.” Institute on Religion and World Affairs, Boston University,  13 December 2003.

Verba, S. 1995. Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wald, K. D. 1987. Religion and politics in the United States. New York: St.Martin’s Press.

Wuthnow, R. 1999. Mobilizing civic engagement: The changing impact of religious involvement. In “Civic engagement in American democracy”, ed. by T.Skocpol, pp.331-363. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.