Theosis, or the principle of divine-human communion, sparks the theological imagination of Orthodox Christians and has been historically important to questions of political theology. In The Mystical as Political: Democracy and Non-Radical Orthodoxy, Aristotle Papanikolaou argues that a political theology grounded in the principle of divine-human communion must be one that unequivocally endorses a political community that is democratic in a way that structures itself around the modern liberal principles of freedom of religion, the protection of human rights, and church-state separation. Papanikolaou hopes to forge a non-radical Orthodox political theology that extends beyond a reflexive opposition to the West and a nostalgic return to a Byzantine-like unified political-religious culture. His exploration is prompted by two trends: the fall of communism in traditionally Orthodox countries has revealed an unpreparedness on the part of Orthodox Christianity to address the question of political theology in a way that is consistent with its core axiom of theosis; and recent Christian political theology, some of it evoking the notion of “deification,” has been critical of liberal democracy, implying a mutual incompatibility between a Christian worldview and that of modern liberal democracy. The first comprehensive treatment from an Orthodox theological perspective of the issue of the compatibility between Orthodoxy and liberal democracy, Papanikolaou’s is an affirmation that Orthodox support for liberal forms of democracy is justified within the framework of Orthodox understandings of God and the human person. His overtly theological approach shows that the basic principles of liberal democracy are not tied exclusively to the language and categories of Enlightenment philosophy and, so, are not inherently secular.

Orthodox Churches, like most religious bodies, are inherently political: they seek to defend their core values and must engage in politics to do so, whether by promoting certain legislation or seeking to block other legislation. This volume examines the politics of Orthodox Churches in Southeastern Europe, emphasizing three key modes of resistance to the influence of (Western) liberal values: Nationalism (presenting themselves as protectors of the national being), Conservatism (defending traditional values such as the “traditional family”), and Intolerance (of both non-Orthodox faiths and sexual minorities). The chapters in this volume present case studies of all the Orthodox Churches of the region.

"There is little written about the Russian Orthodox Church, and precious little by political scientists who use qualitative, critical methods. This book is a welcome contribution and will receive attention from political scientists, anthropologists, and sociologists of religion." ---Catherine Wanner. Associate Professor of History. Anthropology and Religious Studies. Penn State University --Book Jacket.

Nation-building processes in the Orthodox commonwealth brought together political institutions and religious communities in their shared aims of achieving national sovereignty. Chronicling how the churches of Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, and Serbia acquired independence from the Patriarchate of Constantinople in the wake of the Ottoman Empire’s decline, Orthodox Christianity and Nationalism in Nineteenth-Century Southeastern Europe examines the role of Orthodox churches in the construction of national identities. Drawing on archival material available after the fall of communism in southeastern Europe and Russia, as well as material published in Greek, Serbian, Bulgarian, Romanian, and Russian, Orthodox Christianity and Nationalism in Nineteenth-Century Southeastern Europe analyzes the challenges posed by nationalism to the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the ways in which Orthodox churches engaged in the nationalist ideology.

For a long time, Orthodox Christianity was regarded as a religious tradition that was incompatible with democracy. This book challenges this incompatibility thesis, offering an innovative and fresh theoretical framework for dealing with the issue of Orthodoxy and democracy. This book focuses on the political behaviour of Orthodox Christian Churches in the democratization processes from a comparative perspective, and shows that different Orthodox Churches acted differently in the democratization processes in Greece, Serbia and Russia. The fundamental question that arises is - why? By focusing on institutions, rather than on political theology, this book answers this question from a comparative perspective. By studying the historical, cultural, and political roles of the Orthodox Christian Church in these three countries, the author examines whether it is logical to presume that the Church played a significant role in the democratization process. This book will be of great interest to academics and students globally who teach, study, and research in the emerging field of religion and democracy.

The Church is commonly viewed as an earthly institution, and is much less frequently recognized as a spiritual and heavenly reality called by God “ to make disciples of all nations” (Matt 28:19). This structured and integrated work offers a vision of a Christian Orthodox political thought in which the Church is neither sidelined as having no relevance to this present life, nor dominated by temporal questions or popular movements at the expense of its eternal salvific mission.The author grounds the mission of the Church in the present world both on an understanding of God as Trinity and in her mission to baptize diverse cultures. To do this effectively the Church must recognize and adapt to local and contemporary political and social trends and patterns. It must exemplify the Gospel as a way of communal and social life, not allowing itself to be reduced to an impersonal ideology manifested within the sphere of imagination, opinions, or a private individualistic existence.Drawing upon this philosophy, the author proposes a way for believers to understand questions of both domestic politics and international relations with a view to bringing the world into the Kingdom of God. He suggests specific steps that could be taken to heal and strengthen inter-Orthodox relations, addressing in particular the canonical challenges of the Orthodox diaspora and tensions between the Greek and Slavic components of the Church. He addresses specifically the conflict between the majority Orthodox nations of Russia and Ukraine. Whilst his specific proposals will by no means enjoy universal acceptance, they can serve as a springboard for further dialogue as the Orthodox world seeks to apply these principles in all nations, whatever their current political circumstances may be.