My title here may create issues for some, as they would say it's not both/and when it comes to orthodoxy and heterodoxy. It can only be either/or. If orthodoxy is the belief in doctrine, then the heterodox would take issue with any official position to belief. They would play in an open field to come up with something new.
I suppose some would say in the postmodern era, we are all heterodox. Then again, Fr. Andrew Damick says, “Orthodox dogma never claims to expound the whole truth about anything, but only delineates the borders of the mystery.” He expounds, “You can be a true theologian in the Orthodox Church and yet be mentally retarded, because true theology is not defined by the acuity of the rational mind, but by the quality of the prayer of the heart.”
Here, I think we can agree. And it is in the space between doctrinal belief of the orthodox and the more open expressive beliefs of the heterodox, where we can meet in the inner science of the heart. While there may be paths that are doctrinally divided, they are still charismatically one.
I recently watched a video by Bishop Robert Barron, where he acknowledges that had Luther not made grace alone as part of his doctrine, but instead made it only primary, it could very well be he would have created another order in the Roman Catholic Church instead of a major historic schism. In other words, maybe there is a place where the orthodox and heterodox can meet.
Which leads me to A Different Christianity by Robin Amis, who embraced Christian Orthodoxy by spending some time with the monks at Mount Athos. But he also studied some modern mystics (Gurdjieff, Mouravieff), who were able to couch Eternal Truths with language that was more culturally relevant.
(I recommend viewing the 60 Minutes segment on Mount Athos. It sort of brings out a fantasy of mine to spend time in such a setting; however, I am well aware that I am probably best a lay householder than a true ascetic.)
Amis brings out the deep mysticism that is inherent to Orthodox Christianity. So much so, I sense if more seekers knew about it in the west, they would not turn east (Buddhism, Hinduism) to find themselves. He notes these practices can create “an actual shift within the individual of the center of awareness” where there is a redirection “from thought, imagination, and physical sensations to the heart.”
In his own way, Amis acknowledges that it is this shift that makes one a Christian: “The Greek philosophical teachings are incomplete in the sense that they leave their student destitute of strength to perform the commandments of the Lord”; however, “The Christian inner teaching, if comprehended in full, is complete in the sense that once it has been fully assimilated or digested, it gives the student the strength to perform those commandments.”
But unlike my counterparts of eastern practices (Buddhism, Hinduism) that rely primarily on own's effort, the Christian inner teachings rely on the grace of God along with man. “Some people believe that inner growth and “working on oneself ” are something we do of ourselves. Nothing much comes of it all until we learn that despite the great efforts we must make, this view is not wholly true. Others believe that spiritual change happens in an instant, as if by magic. Both these views are based on a lack of self-knowledge, on inadequate information about what actually happens. The inner change that matters is a work of God in synergy with man. This is a process, and a process takes time. (Amis)”
In place of the common conventional term awakening, the Orthodox Christians refer to metanoia. “In most English translations of the Bible, metanoia is translated “repentance.” Whatever it meant when the King James translation was originally produced, today the English word has acquired moralistic overtones that have obscured and confused the early meaning. It is not generally understood that the word metanoia (meta-noia) actually refers to the renewal of the nous described by Saint Paul in Romans: “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your nous, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God” (Romans 12:2). (Amis)”
Metanoia is not to be reached by technique, but simply cultivated through a method of prayer (as in a relationship with Christ) and attention (without control). “Metanoia is two things: a slow transformation of the nous and a sudden reversal. The first is an inner healing process by which we lengthen and deepen the stillness of the nous until it begins to become enlightened, and so begins to overcome the effects of the Fall. But the final change is discontinuous: in this context a partial reversal of direction is a meaningless concept, so that we will discover that metanoia can be instantaneous and in some sense is always instantaneous, yet to those who work at it, metanoia is a slow and difficult process; only when we face and work against this difficulty does the Christian religion pass for us from being an idea to being a reality. Only then can we behave as Christians, as well as thinking that we are Christians. (Amis)”
As these inner experiences become more common and stabilize in our lives, we will eventually accept these experiences as real and meaningful sources of knowledge. But there also needs to be a context, and that usually comes from metaphysics of the path we are on. In Christian Orthodoxy, the path and the goal are the one in the same: “All we have to do is to become what we are: to be ourselves as God made us; to do what we see to be right according to our inherent sense of what is right and our best abilities. (Amis)”
If Reality is what is, then to become what we are is I am.
