New concerns about Orthodoxy grow within and without it. Many no longer have a romantic outlook on Orthodoxy of the sort that flourished in the second half of the 20th century but see it as intrinsically susceptible to weaponisation. To correct this outlook, the Orthodox need to start a thorough self-evaluation through ecclesiology and political theology. The paper explores the ecclesiological and theopolitical preconditions that have led to the support of dictatorships in the past, as well as the modern wars waged between the Orthodox peoples. It also suggests ways out of the ongoing crises of the Orthodox identity and theology based on the Church’s emancipation from imperial and authoritarian phantoms, as well as on observing the demarcation lines between the church and the state. Shifting from the “ecclesiology from above” to the “ecclesiology from below” could help the Orthodox church overcome the crises.

Christianity emerged valuing horizontal socio-political relations, which it inherited from Jesus Christ, and which resonated with the ideals of ancient Greek and Roman republicanism. As the church engaged with the Roman Empire, its republican roots faded,adopting monarchical traits. Still, republicanism never disappeared from the church or the Christian Empire. In the former, it took the form of synodality and became reflected in the ways of electing bishops. In the latter, the church became a part of the power-sharing system, effectively substituting the Senate. In contrast to the stereotype that the church is intrinsically monarchical and supports monarchies, this paper argues that the original Christian ethos is more republican than monarchical. As a result, the church has the potential to enhance democracies in the modern geopolitical landscape.

The chapter explores connections between two phenomena: theosis and the church. Initially, such connections were not obvious, as the notion of the church was rudimentary and expressed mainly through metaphors. One may discern early metaphors referring to the church and theosis, such as the images of the second Adam and recapitulation. Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite introduced a new way of thinking about the church and theosis. This way was restrictive and hierarchical. The adoption of dialectical categories by the Christian theology advanced the understanding of theosis and its connectedness with the church. Theologians, especially in the East, came to distinguish between the common potentiality and particular actuality of deification. The former, which they called isotheon, transformed to the latter, theosis in the church. The Russian religious philosophy provided a framework for a modern synthesis between the ideas of the Incarnation, the church, and deification.

The paper explores the gap between the church, seen from the ivory tower of high ecclesiology, and the ecclesial realities on the ground. It criticizes the romantic approach to the phenomenon of the church, which tends to ignore such a gap. It argues that ignoring the church’s shortcomings may lead to catastrophic consequences, including endorsing wars. A romantic approach to the church can generate momentum for mission, but its results can easily lead to the frustration of those converted. An honest mission should include disclaimers about past mistakes made by the church. It is also the only way to avoid similar mistakes in the future. Building bridges over the gaps between the church romanticized and the real church helps its members grow spiritually and, ultimately, enhances the church’s mission.