<\/a><\/p>\nSuch a dynamic, I argue, is representative of the way reasoning functions in the Orthodox Christian tradition that habitually privileges spirituality and affective experiences over other forms of cognition. The apophatic Orthodox theology postulates the impossibility of cognizing God or divine mysteries rationally. Instead, believers are encouraged to consolidate their faith through participation in rituals and the pursuit of mystical experiences that bring them closer to God (Naumescu 2018). Anthropological research on religious transmission in Orthodox Christianity highlights the central role sensory experiences and bodily practices play in the process of both bringing about the experience construed as \u201cspiritual\u201d by its practitioners and reinforcing people\u2019s commitment to faith (Boylston 2013; Luehrmann 2018). While Orthodox Christianity has a rich theological tradition in which reasoning and argumentation play a central role, the theological knowledge most lay believers possess is rather fragmented and they often defer to the authority of tradition and expert opinions of the priests when it comes to doctrinal matters (Bandak and Boylston 2014).<\/p>\n
Such an epistemic regime that explicitly positions the sacred mysteries beyond the reach of reasoning proves instrumental in securing the transmission of faith in the context of encroaching secularism and the attacks of skeptics. However, it also poses a challenge to the institutional authority of the Church whose monopoly over the interpretation of the religious tradition can be challenged by schismatics and charismatic visionaries. Taught to rely on their intuitions and feelings and often lacking a deep knowledge of Church tradition, believers are easily drawn to beliefs and ritualistic practices not sanctioned by the Church \u2013 a phenomenon known as \u201cpopular\u201d or \u201cfolk\u201d religion. It is precisely in this context of tensions between the doctrinal and popular practices that reason-based arguments, otherwise downplayed in Orthodox religious pedagogy, come to the fore. Drawing on their authoritative knowledge of theology, priests come up with elaborate arguments to denounce and discredit the persisting non-canonical practices, like for instance the veneration of an uncanonized soldier.<\/p>\n
The case of Orthodox Christianity seems to nicely dovetail with the argument advanced by Mercier and Sperber, as it demonstrates that even a tradition that generally does not rely on reason for the formation and transmission of its core beliefs still makes active use of argumentative reasoning to maintain the hegemony of the Church as an institution over the sanctioning of beliefs and practices. The strategy of appealing to reason, however, is only successful in some cases. For instance, the arguments brought by the Church against the canonization of Rodionov failed to convince his venerators, who dismissed the Commission\u2019s decision as politically-motivated, suggesting it was guided by fear of further exacerbating Christian-Muslim tensions in Russia. The calls upon the Church to revise the soldier\u2019s case persist and many among Rodionov\u2019s venerators are convinced that his eventual recognition is imminent. Such a scenario is indeed plausible, given that the large-scale popular veneration of a person (especially when combined with the testimonies about his\/ her miracles) can itself serve as a ground for canonization in Orthodox tradition. When reason fails to successfully curtail the uncanonical beliefs and practices, the latter can eventually come to be incorporated into the tradition thus expanding its repertoire of authorized practices.<\/p>\n
\nReferences<\/strong><\/p>\nBandak, Andreas and Boylston, Tom. 2014. \u201cThe ‘Orthodoxy’ of Orthodoxy: On Moral\u00a0Imperfection, Correctness, and Deferral in Religious Worlds.\u201d Religion and Society<\/em> 5 (1):\u00a05-46.<\/p>\nBoylston, Tom. 2013. \u201cFood, Life, and Material Religion in Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity\u201d.\u00a0Pp. 257-274 in A Companion to the Anthropology of Religion<\/em> edited by J. Boddy and M.\u00a0Lambek. London: Wiley Blackwell.<\/p>\nLuehrmann, Sonja, eds. Praying with the Senses. Contemporary Orthodox Christian\u00a0Spirituality\u00a0<\/em>in Practice. <\/em>Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.<\/p>\nMaksimov, Maksim. 2004. \u201cMozhmo li Speshit\u2019 s Kanonizatsiiei?\u201d Tserkovnyi Vestnik<\/em> 1-2: 278-279.<\/p>\nNaumescu, Vlad. 2018. \u201cBecoming Orthodox. The Mystery and Mastery of a Christian\u00a0Tradition.\u201d Pp. 29-53 in\u00a0Praying with the Senses. Contemporary Orthodox\u00a0<\/em>Christian\u00a0Spirituality in Practice<\/em>\u00a0edited by S. Luehrmann. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana\u00a0University Press.<\/p>\n***<\/p>\n[1] A number of clergymen supporting the soldier\u2019s case did, however, engage in polemic with their colleagues, arguing that few of the saints venerated by the Russian Orthodox Church would meet the canonization criteria put forth by the Church today.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"In their recent book The Enigma of Reason (2017), Mercier and Sperber debunk the popular view of reason as a source of disinterested, accurate knowledge about the world. The function of reason, they argue, is polemical rather than hermeneutic, as we mostly produce reasons to justify our actions to others and to evaluate the arguments […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1398,"featured_media":8594,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[288],"tags":[],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
Reasoning against Faith: When Clerics Intervene in Popular Religion - International Cognition and Culture Institute<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n