Orthodoxy and Rights

Plan and Introduction to the Reading Sessions

Thursday, June 20th, SOPHIE 2019

Introduction to the Two Reading Sessions

After the welcome lunch at 1 pm at the Hermitage on Thursday, June 20th, SOPHIE starts
with two sessions (1.5 hours each) dedicated to discussing the prepared readings. The
general topic for both sessions is the relation between the Orthodox Tradition and Rights
(Human Rights, the Rights of the Englishman, etc.). The background of the discussion is the
relationship between Church and state in today’s secular political environments.

Each session has its own focus and its specific set of readings. Most of these have been
shortened or selected in order to preserve the focus of our discussions. The readings of
Session I are from Holy Scriptures (I.a.), completed by texts shedding light on the
Christianized Roman Law (I.b.). Session II focuses on the difference between the two legal
traditions of the rights of the Englishman (II.a.) and human rights (II.b.), and between
established secular and newly developed Orthodox renderings of the latter. The goal of both
sessions is to explore the basis for an Orthodox vision of such rights which remains faithful
to the Tradition.

All participants are expected to have read this material ​before the conference and prepared
themselves with comments, questions, and specific topics they want to discuss, in order to
allow a fruitful exchange. Below you find for each session a list of questions suggested as
relevant (but, of course, not exhausting).

Session I | Law, Duties, and Rights according to Christian Sources

2pm – 3.30pm |​ ​Chair: Fr. Capodistrias Hämmerli

The passages from Holy Scriptures (I.a) explore the concept of commandments and law, as
set in a theological context framed by Old Testament sacred history and the importance of
the holiness of God, as well as the teachings of the Lord and of Apostle Paul in the New
Testament.

The second series of texts (I.b) focus on Roman Law and how it has been received and
transformed during the period when the Empire was being Christianized. There is a focus in
particular on the work of Emperor Saint Justinian (483-565), who tried to clarify,
consolidate, and unify the inheritance of Roman Law in the context of the Christian
Romania.

Some questions which might be discussed are​:

1. What are the semantic distinctions between the words “commandments,” “laws,”
“customs,” “duties,” and “rights”? What role does holiness play in relation to those
concepts?
1
2. What do you think of the example of king Josias and his religious reform? Should we
take it as an example of political endeavor to be pursued today?
3. Do the texts from Apostle Paul and Peter mean that Christians should never revolt
against the state?
4. Should we receive the legislative work of Saint Justinian as a model to think about law
today? Is Justinian’s civil law really that different from common law as Blackstone
claims?
5. Is McGuckin’s endorsement of more “kenotic” human rights Orthodox?

Sessi​on II | Rights, Liberties, and Obligations in Common Law and

(secular/Orthodox) renderings of civil law
4pm – 5.30pm |​ ​Chair: Cornelia Delkeskamp-Hayes

The second section assembles a number of official political and legal documents reflecting
modernity’s two competing (common law and civil law) understandings of political “rights.”
These understandings (II.a. and II.b.) focus on rights either as bound to a vision of political
struggles in England or else in terms of a vision of moral justice informing “human rights.”
They are confronted with two representative samples of Orthodox responses to the latter.

Selections from interpretative texts explore historical backgrounds and perceived political
utility (Blackstone, Stoeckl, Agadjanian) as well as implications for economic thought
(Block) and ideological transformation of society (Cherry). Additional commentaries
illustrate ways in which the pluralism at the basis of secular human rights advocacy can
either expose the impossibility of accommodating Orthodoxy within the space allowed by
Western-style “religious freedom” (Guroian) or in which Orthodox historians’ vision of their
Tradition becomes vulnerable to an ecumenism-welcoming “affirmation of otherness”
(Papathomas).

Some questions which might be discussed are​:

1. What are the main differences between the philosophy underpinning human rights and
the world view underpinning common law (the rights of the Englishman)?
2. Are the rights of the Englishmen more compatible with Orthodoxy than the European
civil law tradition?
3. What is the impact of different accounts of human rights on the possibility of educating
children within the family in the Orthodox faith?
4. How do you understand and evaluate the position of the Russian Church in Her official
documents? Does it succeed are reconciling individual freedoms and collective cultural
rights?
5. In the light of the ​Basis of the Social Concept (​ 2000, ROK) included under section I:
How much sense is there to the claim of the Christian origin of human rights today?