I'm also Presbyterian and thought it was interesting how the fascination in Eastern Orthodox was rising. I think there are a lot of people who grew up in the shallow big Eva world and want something more, and find the mystery and more "traditional" or "Orthodox" nature of Eastern Orthodox really appealing.
I am a wholehearted member of (and officer for) the [Orthodox Presbyterian Church](https://opc.org). Given the rise of Eastern Orthodoxy in the West, I am often asked what that 'Orthodox' means in the name of our denomination?
Here is a helpful answer: ["Orthodox" Revisited - Part 3](https://opc.org/qa.html?question_id=37). In sum:
- strictly etymologically, it means "right worship"
- in this use, however, it means 'right teaching" and was chosen in contradistinction to the Modernist-ridden mainline Presbyterian denomination out of which "we" were thrust in the early 20th century. There was an earlier name chosen, but the mainline & Modernist Presbyterian denomination actually _sued_ "us" over it for being "too similar." So, as a bit of a cheeky response, "we" said--"OK, fine: so you guys can be the 'Presbyterians'--and (since we have not moved away from the actual doctrines of the historic, Protestant, and Presbyterian church) we'll be the 'Orthodox' Presbyterians." (ha!)
- No, it does not bear any relation to the 'Eastern Orthodox' denomination / tradition _per se_ , though we certainly share with them agreement on the early Ecumenical creeds, etc.
Discussion
I agree with that. I remember when Franky (son of Francis) Schaeffer made the move to EO many (~20?) years ago, there was a lot of discussion about the 'draw' of EO. I was a youth pastor in the early 2000s and saw a lot of the pomo types wanting the experience of and perceived connection to 'historic' worship or the 'ancient' church but without the doctrinal "baggage." The 'emergent' movement was all the rage then. Thankfully at that time I was listening to John Piper quite a bit, who--despite his other faults--emphasized the life of the mind, and the clarity of Scripture, which probably immunized me a bit against the pomo trend. The question behind the questions is almost always, "has God spoken to us, in a way that we can understand, such that we can _know_ ?"
I believe Scripture's answer to that question is 'yes, he has.'
I have a suspicion, not yet confirmed (speaking somewhat academically), that the rise in EO interest maps to the general trend toward all things Eastern in the cultural West. I don't know how well equipped the EO is/are, given their decidedly mystical vs. doctrinal bent, to counter the meteoric rise in gnostic / theosophic interest--such that someone could hold some blend of EO and gnosticism/theosophy without too much cognitive dissonance. BUT I don't know, so if this is way off base and offends any of my EO brethren then I mean no offense.
