On May 28-31 an International Conference was successfully held in Sofia Cultural Center, Helsinki on the general theme: “Political Orthodoxy and totalitarianism in the post-communist era”. The conference was organized by the Volos Academy for Theological Studies in cooperation with the Orthodox Christian Studies Center, Fordham University (New York, USA); the Chair of Orthodox Theology, Münster University (Germany); the Romanian Institute for Inter-Orthodox, Inter-Confessional and Inter-Religious Studies (INTER, Cluj-Napoca, Romania); the St Andrews Biblical Theological Institute (Moscow); the Institute for the Study of Culture and Christianity (Belgrade, Serbia); the Sankt Ignatios Orthodox Theological Academy (Stockholm, Sweden); and the European Forum of the Orthodox Schools of Theology (EFOST, Brussels), with the support of the Orthodox Metropolis of Helsinki.

In the opening of the conference Dr. Pantelis Kalaitzidis, (Director Volos Academy for Theological Studies, Lecturer at the Hellenic Open University, FWO Pegasus Short Marie Curie Research Fellow at KU Leuven, Greece/Belgium) greeted the conference, by pointing out on the one hand the relevance of the topic and the creative effort of the cooperated institutions towards Orthodoxy’s revitalization and highlighting on the other the role that it called to play within context of the modern era. The conference was also greeted by the Archbishop of Karelia and All Finland Leo (read by the Metropolitan Ambrosius of Helsinki), and by the Lutheran Archbishop of Turku and Finland Kari Mäkinen.

In the first session moderated by Dr. Pantelis Kalaitzidis, Metropolitan Ambrosius of Helsinki, spoke on “Demythologizing” of Nation in Finland”. Metrοpolitan Ambrosius discussed the nature of the autonomy of the Orthodox Church in Finland, the participation of laity and clergy on all structures of church administration based on freedom and democracy, in opposition to authoritarian administer tradition of Eastern Orthodoxy. Finally he tried to emphasize the priority of mission and witness as our strength in the pluralist society of Finland. Rev. Dr. Cyril Hovorun (Research Fellow, Yale University, USA) presented a paper on “Political Orthodoxy: an ideology? A civil religion? A heresy?” His paper begun with how the term ‘Political Orthodoxy’ was coined in the Ukrainian context in 2007. It continued with an attempt to define what is ‘Political Orthodoxy’ and to identify the global taxonomy of political orthodoxies (nationalism, ‘orientalism’, fundamentalism, etc.). The final speaker of this session was Dr. Ivana Noble (Professor of Ecumenical Theology, Protestant Faculty of Theology, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic) who spoke on the topic: “Theology after totalitarian experience”. In her paper Dr Noble a based on a case study of the Czech Republic investigated the ways in which theology can serve as a critical conscience for the church in the contexts of a Communist regime and for working through its heritage, when both theologians and the churches were also partly shaped by the totalitarian experience.

In the first morning session of the second day (Friday, May 29th) of the conference moderated by Elena Gorschkow-Salonranta (Advisor NGO, Member of the Council of the Orthodox Parish of Helsinki), Dr. Nadieszda Kizenko, (Associate Professor, Department of History, College of Arts and Sciences, Albany University, New York, USA) spoke on the topic “The concept of Orthodoxy within the Political sciences.” Orthodoxy appears in Russian political science discourse differently than it does in American political theory. This paper surveyed those differences. (for instance Alexander Dugin, Alexander Panarin use the notion of ‘Orthodox Eurasianism’ - by contrast, in the United States, some political scientists argue that Orthodoxy can be a source of inspiration for democracy). Dr. Michael  Hjälm,  (Dean  of  Sankt  Ignatios  Theological  Academy,  Sodertalje, Assistant Professor, Department of Theology, University of Uppsala, Sweden) presented a paper on the topic “Deconstruction  and  Hope:  The  Foundation  of  Self-Assessment  and  Accountability  and  a Trepidation within Contemporary Orthodox Theology.” According to the speaker the dissolution of the Soviet Union happened rather quickly. Suddenly hardly anyone would recognize themselves as communists. The Russian Orthodox Church came out victorious. Today the majority of the Russian Orthodox are secularized and do not go to church. Still, we find a strong support for the church that reaches above seventy percentages. The lecture explored the reason why we have a strong support of the church and at the same time few attendees in services, and argued that the church became a symbol of continuity and renewal, a symbol of imperial permanence. Dr. Davor Džalto, (Associate Professor, American University of Rome, Chairman of the Institute for the Study of Culture and Christianity, Belgrade, Italy/Serbia), spoke on “Speaking Truth, Challenging Power Structures: (Orthodox) Theology as a Critical Discourse.” This paper addressed the issue of Orthodox theology as a “critical discourse,” which seeks to deconstruct power structures, and explored the theological basis of such discourse.

In the second morning session moderated by Dr. Assaad Elias Kattan (Professor, Chair of Orthodox Theology, University of Münster, Germany), Dr. Effie Fokas, (Research Fellow at the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) Principal Investigator in a European Research Council-funded project related to religious freedoms jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (GRASSROOTSMOBILISE) spoke on “The challenge of Pluralism in Orthodoxy”. This paper drew on empirical research conducted on pluralism and religious freedom in four majority Orthodox countries, the aim of which was to ascertain factors and mechanisms influencing various expressions of pluralism as problem. Finding as a common denominator amongst these expressions a close relationship between religion and national identity, the paper engaged specifically with the religion-national identity link and explored the often fine line between its banal, benign and pernicious manifestations. Dr. Kristina Stoeckl, (Austrian Program for Advanced Research and Technology, Fellow of the Austrian Academy of Sciences at the University of Vienna, Department of Political Sciences) presented a paper on “The Politics of Morality in the Russian Orthodox Church's approach to Human Rights”. This presentation looked at the ways in which the Russian Orthodox Church has approached the international human rights regime in the context of the adoption of the “Teaching on Human Dignity, Freedom and Rights” by the Bishops Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in 2008. It argued that this document has become the basis for a number of policy interventions by the Church in defense of “morality,” both inside Russia as well as in its external relations, and it gave some illustrations for this claim. Dr. Radu Preda, (Director, Romanian Institute for Inter-Orthodox, Inter- Confessional and Inter-Religious Studies-INTER, Associate Professor  of Social Theology, Faculty of Orthodox Theology, Babes-Bolai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania) presented a paper on “Human Rights as Social-theological Challenge for the Orthodox Praxis and Mentality”. It is common knowledge that for both Orthodox theology, as a theoretical system, and the Orthodox Church, as an institution, dealing with the concept of human rights is a challenging endeavor. What is the source of the human rights? Firstly, human rights have been at the centre of a long battles carried by Catholicism and, partly, by Protestantism, with the new liberal views. Secondly, if we are to focus on Orthodoxy itself, human rights have not always and in their entirety been rejected. The present moment, a quarter of a century after the fall of communism, offers a new and possibly better context in which Orthodoxy can restart the dialogue with the ethos that lies at the foundation of human rights.

After the lunch break, in the first afternoon session moderated by Dr. Ivana Noble, Rev. Dr. Paul Gavrilyuk, (Professor, Aquinas Chair in Theology and Philosophy, Theology Department, St. Thomas University, USA), spoke on the topic “Russian Political Theology in Exile: Berdyaev, Bulgakov, and the Eurasians.” The paper focused on Russian émigré political theologies of Nicholas Berdyaev, Sergius Bulgakov, and the Eurasians. Berdyaev and Bulgakov stood at the helm of the most significant theological movement in Russian and Ukrainian intellectual history, namely, the religious-philosophical renaissance of the twentieth century. In widely discussed collection, The Landmarks (1909), the leaders of the renaissance offered a religious interpretation of Marxism in its Russian garb, anticipated the atrocities of the Bolshevik revolution, and attempted to liberalize the church politically on the one hand and call secular intelligentsia to religious faith on the other hand. Nikolaos Asproulis,  (PhD ABD, MTh,  Academic Associate of the Volos Academy for Theological Studies, and the journal Theologia) spoke on the topic ““Church and World Dogmatics”: A new perspective for Orthodox theology and education in a post-Communist world”. In this paper an attempt was made to a. briefly overview basic aspects of the history of Orthodox theology in searching for possible representative examples of this new model of doing theology, b. To describe the basic features of our post-communist context within which Orthodox theology and education is called to witness the Gospel and finally c. To present some fundamental prerequisites upon which the “Church and Word Dogmatics” way of doing theology, should be rooted.

In the last session of the first day moderated by Dr. Alexei Bodrov (Rector St. Andrew’s Biblical Theological Institute, Moscow, Russia), Dr. Vasilios   Makrides, (Professor of Sociology of Orthodox Christianity, University of Erfurt, Germany) spoke on “Orthodox Christianity and Liberalism: Critical Reflections on a Debated Topic in History and at Present.” The purpose of this paper was to look not only at  the contemporary debates on Orthodox Christianity and liberalism, but also back at history in an attempt to place and consider this issue on a broader religious, intellectual and cultural canvas. Its main aim was to offer an overview of the entire topic in its main manifestations and to examine critically various related Orthodox positions. Dr. Aristotle Papanikolaou, (Archbishop Demetrios Professor in Orthodox Theology and Culture, Co-Founder Orthodox Christian Studies Center, Fordham University, New York, USA) presented a paper on “Orthodox Liberalism and Secularism: Overcoming Political Nestorianism”. Nearly 25 years after the collapse of communism, the Orthodox Churches within Eastern Europe have reacted negatively to political liberalism and secularization and have contributed to shifting the ideological and theological basis for a new East-West divide. This paper argued that such a reaction manifests a form of political Nestorianism insofar as it grounded in a dualistic logic that the Council of Chalcedon attempts to overcome, while it argued for a Chalcedonian politics that affirms a modified form of political liberalism and secularization as Orthodox. Dr. Lucian Leustean, (Aston University, Birmingham, and Senior Fellow, Transatlantic Academy, Washington DC, United Kingdom/USA) spoke on “Eastern Christianity and the Liberal International Order”. This talk examined the political mobilization of Eastern Orthodox Churches in the European Union as part of the wider liberal international order. It addressed religious dialogue in the European Community from the 1950 Schuman Declaration until today; the political typology of Orthodox representations in Brussels and Strasbourg; and policy priorities on issues of ‘religion,’ ‘faith,’ and Orthodoxy in the European Union.

In the first morning session of the third day (Saturday, May 30th) of the conference moderated by Rev. Heikki Huttunen (General Secretary, Finnish Ecumenical Council, Orthodox Church of Finland, Helsinki), Dr. Vera Shevzov, (Professor of Religious Studies, Smith College, USA) spoke on the topic “The Concept of “Russian World”: Its Evolution in the Post-Soviet Orthodox Context.” The purpose of this paper was to examine a) the evolution of the notion of Russian World in the Orthodox context, b) the motivating factors and aims behind it and c) the understanding of Russia, its history and the Church’s role in that history that the concept of Russian World promotes. Rev. Dr. Nicholas Denysenko, (Assistant Professor, Department of Theology, Loyola University Marymount, USA) presented a paper on “Ecclesial Legitimacy and Identity: The Churches and the War in Ukraine.” This paper analyzed the intra-Orthodox divisions in Ukraine by illuminating the problems of ecclesial legitimacy and identity. The paper began by summarizing the contemporary narratives that defined the causes of the schisms within Orthodoxy in Ukraine. In order to illustrate the origins of this crisis, the paper examined how the attempt to restore Ukrainian religious identity among autocephalist Ukrainians in the early twentieth century resulted in a series of divisions among the Orthodox Churches. This paper argued that the search for authentic religious identity in the Church has been muted by the polemics of ecclesial legitimacy, and called for theologians to draw from the sacramental tradition to the Church to update the search for religious identity as a cooperative venture of global Orthodoxy. Dr. Anna Briskina-Müller, (Faculty of Theology, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Germany) spoke about “Power and Victory as central categories of the Russian Church and State Discourse today.” This contribution dealt with the role of such categories as power and victory in the Russian public discourse – in the society as well as in the Church - today.

In the second morning session moderated by Dr. Davor Džalto (Associate Professor, American University of Rome, Chairman of the Institute for the Study of Culture and Christianity, Belgrade, Italy/Serbia), Dr. Alexei Bodrov, (Rector, St. Andrew’s Biblical Theological Institute, Moscow, Russia) spoke on “Orthodoxy, Islam and State in post-Communist Russia.” Orthodoxy and Islam are two main religions in Russia, they both compete for the support of the state, they both claim that they are part of the national tradition, and as such may serve as reliable partners of the state and a foundation for its ideology. These three - Russian Orthodoxy, Russian Islam and the Russian state - form a ‘trialogue’, which looks very important for all the participating parties though its partners are not equal. Dr.  Souad Slim, (Professor  of  History,  Cultural  Studies  and  Methodology,  Art School, Social Sciences School and Theological Institute Balamand University, Lebanon), presented a paper on “The Imperial Russian Society in Palestine. The Rebirth of an old model.” The Imperial Russian society in Palestine has been founded after two murderous wars: The Crimean War and the war of 1877-78. The aim of the Society was defined by its constitution to help the Orthodox people against proselytism that threatened their church from protestant and catholic missions. Nowadays and in the turmoil of the Middle Eastern region, this association is renewing its activities by enlarging its scope to other non-orthodox communities and to most of the cultural, historical, and anthropological studies and researches in the Middle East. Dr. Krastu Banev, (Department of Religion and  Theology, Durham University, U.K.) spoke on “Bulgarian Orthodoxy facing the challenges of the post-communist era”. On 2 May, 2015, the patriarch Neophyte celebrated the 1150th anniversary of the baptism of the first Bulgarian Christian ruler, Khan Boris in 865. The event took place in Pliska, the capital of the First Bulgarian Kingdom. Guests of honor were the current president of Bulgaria Rosen Plevneliev, the prime minister Boyko Borissov and the former king and former prime minister Simeon Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. All three were decorated by the patriarch for their service to the country. The celebration in Pliska and the decorations of the three politicians are important for a number of reasons. In this context the greatest challenge for Bulgarian Orthodoxy has been the learning of how to discern between good and evil both in remembering its totalitarian past, and in the exercising of its mission today.

After the lunch break, in the first afternoon session moderated by Dr. Michael Hjälm (Dean of Sankt Ignatios Theological Academy, Sodertalje, Assistant Professor, Department of Theology, University of Uppsala, Sweden), Dr. Samir Morcos, (Member to the National Council for Human Rights and of the Norwegian Academy for Arts and freedom of expression, Cairo, Egypt) presented a topic on “Church state society: the case of Egypt.” This contribution aimed to shed light on the nature of the modern Egyptian state, which was founded by Muhammad Ali in the early 19th century. The contribution also addressed the emergence of religious visions by closed groups that do not reflect the Egyptian experience, nor its pluralistic cultural synthesis, nor what I have labeled early on as: “Egyptian Islam” or “Islam of the Egyptian experience.” Dr. Assaad Elias Kattan, (Professor, Chair of Orthodox Theology, University of Münster, Germany), spoke on “Silence as a form of Treason. Church in Syria challenged by the “Spring.” Limiting the current conflict in Syria to its religious component is certainly an unfortunate oversimplification. Yet even an oversimplified construal of this conflict in terms of a civil war between the Sunnites and the Alawites appears to require an unusual churchly discourse that goes beyond a too general emphasis on conviviality between the Christians and the Muslims. By being uncritical, undifferentiated, and non-prophetic, many Christians in Syria are likely to lapse into a qualitative ‘silence’, even when they speak.

In the final session of the conference moderated by Dr. Aristotle Papanikolaou. Dr. Pantelis Kalaitzidis (Director Volos Academy for Theological Studies, Lecturer at the Hellenic Open University, FWO Pegasus Short Marie Curie Research Fellow at KU Leuven, Greece/Belgium), presented a paper on the topic “Church, State and Society in Greece: From the Dictatorship to Democracy, from the Byzantine “Symphonia” to the challenges of the pluralistic society”. As it is well known, the term “symphonia” (or “synallelia”) draws its origin from the Byzantine political model, and serves, especially in the Orthodox context, to designate the special relationship between church and state. If the dictatorship of the colonels in Greece (the junta, 1967-1974) refers, among other things, to the Greek experience of totalitarianism, the Byzantine pre-modern idea of “symphonia” served during all that period as the ideological background and the theological guarantee for the collaboration of the institutional church, and of many Orthodox Christians -especially the ones belonging to the lay movements of the Christian brotherhoods- with the military far right regime. Rev. Dr. Grigorios Papathomas, (Professor at the School of Theology of the University of Athens and the Orthodox Institute of St. Serge, Paris, President of the European Forum of Orthodox Schools of Theology (EFOST, Brussels) spoke about “Democracy, Ecclesiocracy and Ecclesiality”. The thematic of this Conference “Political Orthodoxy and Totalitarianism in a Post- Communist Era” represents a chance to tackle, through this paper, an issue that obliged us to examine it comparatively. This vision brings Ecclesiality and Democracy into a dialectical relationship in link with the deviated phenomenon of Ecclesiocracy. The distinction between these two dimensions helps us to avoid a double confusion: on the one hand that of identifying Ecclesiality with Democracy, and on the other that of allowing this very Ecclesiality to submit to the aeonistic temptation of its historical manifestation as ‘ecclesio-cracy’, on analogy with ‘demo-cracy’.

After the final session the three ecumenical observers, namely Dr. Gabriel Bar Sawme (Youth Director for the Syriac Orthodox Archdiocese for Eastern USA, Princeton Theological Seminary, Oriental Orthodox Church), Dr. Kimmo Kääriäinen (Executive Director of the National Church Council, Department for International Relations of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland), and Dr. Thomas Bremmer (Professor of the Catholic Theological Faculty, University of Münster, Roman Catholic Church), commented on various aspects of the topic and presented their understanding of the conference’s theme from the point of view of their respected tradition. It is noteworthy that at the end of each session enough time was given to the participants to address questions to the speakers leading to a vivid and quite creative discussion.

In Sunday the participants attended the Divine Liturgy celebrated by the Metropolitan Ambrosius of Helsinki at the Uspensky Orthodox Cathedral. The conclusions of the conference took place at the crypt located under the Cathedral where along with a final evaluation of the work of the conference, a special medal of the Orthodox Metropolis of Zimbabwe of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria was delivered by the Metropolitan of Zimbabwe Seraphim Kykotis to Metropolitan Ambrosius of Helsinki.

The conference concluded with a city-tour around various monuments and sightseeing of Helsinki.
Among the participants of the conference were the Lutheran Archbishop of Turku and Finland, the Lutheran Bishop of Helsinki Irja Askola , the representative of the Orthodox Church of Estonia and General Secretary  Fr. Mattias Palli, Fr. Thadée Barnas from the historical monastery of Chevetogne and the journal Irénikon (Belgium), scholars and participants from various countries around the world (Greece, Sweden, Germany, Lebanon, Russia, Belgium, Czech Republic, U.S.A. etc) and many local people interested on the conference’s theme.