Lay Christian Service in the Orthodox Tradition

Orthodox Political Theology, Part III: Historical Patterns & A Model for Orthodox America

This is the third installment in an ongoing series on the topic of Orthodox Political Theology and History. These essays are part of a larger project which I intend to publish in book form. If you find this work beneficial, you can directly support it by becoming a paid subscriber.

Part One: On Orthodox Christian Citizenship & Relations to the State

Part Two: Resistance to Evil by Force—Christian Service in War; Legitimacy, Symphonia, and the Role of Sobornost.

Introduction

We have spoken of Symphonia and Sobornost as they manifest at the intersection of the ecclesial and the secular. We have given historical examples to show these are more than abstract concepts—they are threads running throughout the history of the Christian Church. The incredible unity of life and teaching which the Orthodox Church has preserved throughout time and space is nevertheless expressed through a rich diversity within each local Church and people.

As the Church is planted among a people, it takes what is salvageable from their culture and baptizes it, making Orthodoxy the genuine expression of that people’s innermost self, as God created them to be. Thus, the singular principle or reality of Orthodox life and service is expressed in similar, but unique, ways across time and space, century by century, nation by nation.

By exploring the rich tradition of Orthodox service as it has been lived throughout the centuries, we can begin to discern a path forward for Orthodox Christian political action in the United States and broader Western society. God gives us modern saints especially so that we can witness sanctity and right living in our own time. Thus, we will find that the closer we get to the twenty-first century, the more familiar the patterns set by our forefathers will seem—and the more instructive.

---

Examples of Christian Service: The Georgian Patericon

When the Saint Herman of Alaska Brotherhood Press recently re-released their long out-of-print Lives of Georgian Saints, it confirmed a theme I had picked up from various sources: the Georgian Patericon contains a uniquely high number of saints canonized for their deeds in service to their homeland. What makes this subcategory of confessors (for lack of a better term) unique is that they are not hierarchs, warrior-princes, or monastics, but pious laymen who, for love of their Church and the Christian culture it birthed, endured exile, imprisonment, and immense suffering in resistance to a godless occupying force—foreign or domestic.

Saint Ekvtime Taqaishvili

Born January 3, 1863, Saint Ekvtime was orphaned at a young age and raised by his uncle. From his earliest years, he showed a deep love of learning and excelled in all his studies. He was sent to St. Petersburg University to study in the department of history and philology. As the account of his life states:

"His profound faith and love for God and his motherland determined his every step in [his] demanding and admirable profession… From the very beginning of his career, St. Ekvtime began collecting historical-archeological and ethnographic materials from all over Georgia. His sphere of scholarly influence was broad, including historiography, archaeology, ethnography, epigraphy, numismatics, philology, folklore, linguistics, and art history."¹

He established the Exarchate Museum of Georgia, preserving ancient manuscripts, sacred objects, and copies of frescoes removed from ancient churches. He also founded the Society for Georgian History and Ethnography (1907) and Tbilisi University (1918). As a leading academic and Georgian patriot, it was hard to find a patriotic, social, or cultural movement in which he was not involved.

In 1921, when the Georgian government was forced into exile by the Bolsheviks, the national archives and many cultural treasures were entrusted to St. Ekvtime, who accompanied them to France. He protected these treasures with his life—through the struggles of emigration, the trials of World War II, and the constant threats from American and European scholars and "collectors." Many factions, both at home and abroad, tried to seize these artifacts as personal prizes. Left in destitution, his wife and closest friend died of starvation, and St. Ekvtime himself nearly did on more than one occasion.

"The perils were great for St. Ekvtime and the treasures he protected: British and American museums sought to purchase the Georgian national artifacts; a certain Salome Dadiani, the widow of Count Okholevsky, declared herself the sole heir of the Georgian national treasure; during World War II the Nazis searched St. Ekvtime’s apartment; even the French government claimed ownership of the Georgian national treasures."²

After the war, an agreement between Stalin and de Gaulle allowed for the safe return of both Ekvtime and the national treasures. On April 11, 1945, he boarded a U.S. Army Air Corps plane and was flown home. Upon landing in Georgia, he made a prostration and kissed the ground. His people honored him, restoring his professorship and his place in the Academy of Sciences. Yet his trials were not over.

"In 1951, Chekists arrested his stepdaughter, Lydia Poltoratskaya. St. Ekvtime… was seriously ill [and] left without his caregiver. In 1952, without any explanation, he was forbidden to lecture at the university he had helped to found and was secretly placed under house arrest. The people who had reverently greeted him upon his return now trembled in fear of his persecution and imminent death. Many tried to visit and support St. Ekvtime, but they were forbidden."³

On February 21, 1953, he died of a heart attack. But ten years later, on the centennial of his birth, he was exhumed to be reburied at the Didube Pantheon in Tbilisi. His body—and even his clothing—were found incorrupt.

On October 17, 2002, he was glorified by the Georgian Apostolic Orthodox Church as St. Ekvtime the Man of God. In the hymns written in his honor, his preservation of Georgia’s cultural inheritance is repeatedly mentioned. His glorification by God confirms that such actions are pleasing to Him and worthy of our praise.

“O Holy Man of God Ekvtime, who didst preserve the cultural and spiritual treasures of the Georgian nation with the greatest devotion and didst become an image of love, pray to God, Who is Love, to have mercy on our souls!”

Saint Ilia the Righteous

Another example is Saint Ilia the Righteous, often referred to as the Uncrowned King of Georgia or Father of the Nation.

Born October 27, 1837, in the village of Qvareli in Kakheti, Ilia was first educated at home by his mother, who taught him reading, writing, prayer, and the Law of God. At eight, he began studying under a local holy man, Archdeacon Nikoloz Sepashvili. His parents died while he was still young, and he later lived with his aunt Macrina while attending school in Tbilisi.

Like St. Ekvtime, Ilia attended St. Petersburg University, where he developed a deep love for Georgian history, spending countless hours studying old manuscripts. Though his grades were excellent, the pull of his homeland was stronger. In his fourth year, he dropped out and returned to Georgia to inspire his countrymen to remember their history and the faith of their fathers.

"Ilia was certain that a nation who forgets its own history ‘is like a beggar who knows neither his past nor where he is going.’ [...] The restoration of national independence and the autocephaly of the Georgian Church were the chief objectives towards which St. Ilia strove in every aspect of his life."

He worked to correct distorted accounts of Georgian history and to defend the Georgian language, ensuring it remained the primary language of education. He founded the Society for the Propagation of Literacy among the Georgians, a manuscript repository, and the Georgian Agrarian Bank. He also helped initiate efforts to preserve oral folk traditions.

"We, the Georgian people, have inherited three divine gifts from our ancestors: our motherland, our language, and our faith. If we fail daily to protect these gifts, what merit will we have as men?"⁴

But no good deed goes unpunished. Militant atheist Social Democrats plotted to kill him. As he and his wife Olga traveled by carriage to Saguramo, they were ambushed near the Tsitsamuri Forest. Ilia was murdered in cold blood. Though his killers were sentenced to death, Olga pleaded for clemency, saying her husband would have wanted them to be forgiven.

"Indeed, Ilia had forgiven his murderers long before, in his prophetic poem Prayer:

Our Father Who art in Heaven!
With tenderness I stand before Thee on my knees;
I ask neither wealth nor glory;
I won’t debase my holy prayer with earthly matters.
I would wish for my soul to rest in heaven,
My heart to be radiant with love heralded by Thee,
I would wish to ask forgiveness of mine enemies,
Even if they pierce me in the heart:
Forgive them, Lord, for they know not what they do!"

In 1987, the Holy Synod of the Georgian Orthodox Church canonized him as Saint Ilia the Righteous.

Troparion:
“Son of the Georgian people and martyr for thy nation, most glorious Ilia the Righteous, pray to Christ God to have mercy on our souls.”

Note that he is called a martyr for [his] nation. Certainly, his personal piety and love for God are central to his sanctity—but so too is his love for his country, his efforts to preserve its language, history, and culture at great personal cost. His life is testimony that such labors are pleasing to God.

So, we must ask the liberals: where is this supposed borderless, nationless “Christianity” they claim Christ and His Church preach?

Certainly, it is not found in Georgia.

It’s not that these men were not true Christians in the spiritual sense—certainly they were—but that their deeds and sufferings endured for their nations are upheld by the Church as expressions of piety. They were, as their incorrupt relics and the testimony of the Church attests, glorified by God. They are just as Orthodox as the martyrs and confessors who struggled against Paganism, Islam, and the various pet heresies of emperors.

Whereas those battles were fairly straightforward, the Church in modernity is locked in conflict with the ideological hydra of Enlightenment thought. When one head is cut off, another grows in its place. These ideologies often feign neutrality with respect to God and His Church—at least initially—but over time, they reveal their true hostility, either openly or through a seemingly benign concession: you may keep your faith, so long as it submits to the ultimate authority of the political ideology.

This demanded subjugation of faith to the secular civil religion is the proverbial pinch of incense our society expects of us as Orthodox Christians. As Anthony Lardas notes in his introduction to St. Athanasius Parios’ Apology for Christianity, “Just as the Romans had permitted all cults that offered sacrifice to the genius of the emperor, so too would the French tolerate all cults that submitted to the genius of the state. Humanism was to be the new ‘god above the gods,’ ushering in a second pax Romanum.”⁵

As we have seen, this has instead ushered in the death of the family, an unprecedented rise of debauchery and decadence, and the greatest era of Christian martyrdom in the history of the Church. But that is a critique for another time.

As society yields to these temptations—ignoring the warnings of the Church—these ideologies grow bolder, more explicitly antagonistic to Christ. And yet the Church, spread across the world, remains steadfast in her proclamation of Christ—and in proclaiming that true freedom can only be found in Him. She continues to be adorned with new martyrs, confessors, and bold defenders of the faith. Through them, new apologies for Christianity arise—along with new ways by which the Church engages in the fight against the old enemy of God. These are, of course, never truly “new,” but rather fresh expressions of the faith once delivered to the saints.

Examples of Christian Service: Lay Brotherhoods

Most important to examine for our own times, I believe, is the tradition of lay brotherhoods in the Church. These offer us a model by which we may mold our own efforts—an actionable example that is both wholly and distinctly Orthodox, and capable of meeting the challenges of the modern political landscape. Orthodox brotherhoods and lay associations have traditionally formed to labor for the spiritual prosperity of the people and for just governance by the authorities.

Evidence of their presence in Kievan Rus dates back to the eleventh century, though some sources suggest an even earlier origin. Brotherhoods came into greater prominence during the Latin persecutions surrounding the Union of Brest in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. As authorities sought to stamp out Orthodoxy and Russian identity in Galicia and Volhynia, lay brotherhoods—such as the Lviv Dormition Brotherhood—opened print shops to distribute Orthodox apologetical literature. They established theological schools, such as the Theophany School of the Kiev Brotherhood;⁶ they ran orphanages and retirement facilities, restored and maintained churches, and held together the Orthodox people through difficult times.

These brotherhoods were led by men like the saintly Prince Constantine of Ostrog, who not only financed their efforts but also used his influence to lobby the officials of the Polish-Lithuanian regime. By the eighteenth century, the brotherhoods had expanded into Moldavia and Serbia. Even today, lay brotherhoods in Ukraine continue to defend the Church—fighting against persecution, raising awareness abroad, and lobbying their government to reverse the abysmal laws permitting open hostility toward the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

These lay brotherhoods have also, at times, taken on more explicitly political roles, such as the Union of Russian People during the waning days of the Russian Empire. This group was well-received by the clergy for its support of parish schools and youth programs, its advocacy for the Church at the imperial court, and its backing of the Tsar’s legislative agenda in the newly formed Duma. One honorary member who spoke favorably of the organization’s mission is well known to us: Saint John of Kronstadt.

A particularly instructive example comes from twentieth-century Romania. Known as the Legionary Movement, this lay brotherhood devoted most of its existence to the spiritual formation of youth and the inculcation of Orthodoxy, love of neighbor, and patriotism in the hearts of Romanian men. Fr. George Calciu related:

“It was not meant to be a political organization. It was spiritual. They were focused on the virtues—on prayer, honesty, etc. They were dedicated to the Christian formation and education of young people in the ‘Legionary Movement.’ And they succeeded. They taught a whole generation, and all the big cultural personalities in Romania entered this movement. There was the great philosopher Nae Ionescu; there were poets, men of science. The most beautiful generation between the ages of twenty and thirty-three entered the movement because they felt they needed to protect the Romanian nation against the influence of Russian Communism. But they were persecuted from the beginning.”⁷

For many years, the Legionary Movement had a tremendous impact on Romanian society, forming young men spiritually and teaching them to love Christ and His Church, and to care for their neighbors and nation. Their youth work was carried out primarily through the Brotherhood of the Cross, which helped children establish a prayer rule, live disciplined and honest lives, and respect both authority and one another, largely through a network of schools the brotherhood maintained.

Fr. George Calciu joined the brotherhood in mid-1940, six months before it was forcibly dissolved in January 1941. He noted that of all those—including himself—who later entered the communist prisons and endured a brutal regime of torture designed to utterly break the human spirit, the only ones who survived with their souls intact were former legionnaires or members of the Brotherhood of the Cross. He explained:

“The intention was not to make a political man, but to make an honest citizen. No matter what politics he practiced, he was to be a man of conscience, a man of justice, and a man of faith. This was destroyed in a short time. It hardly had time to get off the ground. It was persecuted almost before it even started.”⁸

The case of the Legionary Movement is instructive not only in its initial success but also in its eventual collapse. As Fr. George emphasized, the organization began with spiritual aims: to form young men into honest citizens. But from within it emerged the Iron Guard, a paramilitary political organization.

After the assassination of its visionary leader Corneliu Codreanu and years of persecution under King Carol II, the movement turned more explicitly political. Under the leadership of Horia Sima, it took on a violent character—engaging in pogroms and armed rebellion—which ultimately led to its downfall. This story is poignant because it shows both the great potential of lay Christian work in society and the limit beyond which God does not bless: namely, offensive violence and the overthrow of lawful authority.

In the West, historians often conflate the Legionary Movement entirely with the Iron Guard, focusing exclusively on its violent final chapter. While it certainly made serious mistakes and ended in darkness⁹, it also raised a generation of Christian warriors who survived—and even spiritually thrived—under one of the most ruthless regimes of torture the world has ever known. Many of these men have since been revealed as saints, hieromartyrs, and confessors, such as Fr. Ilarion Felea, Fr. Ilie Lăcătușu, and Fr. Dumitru Stăniloae—men remembered for their deep and abiding love, even by those who persecuted and killed them.

When coupled with the witness of great saints such as Sts. Benjamin of Petrograd, Alexander Schmorell, John of Shanghai, and the early first hierarchs of the Russian Church Abroad—who all navigated complex and hostile political landscapes—the history of Orthodox brotherhoods offers us a powerful model for Christian political action today.

Orthodox Brotherhoods as a Model for Action Today—A Loose Framework

The real strength of the brotherhood model lies in its ability to address both the political and spiritual maladies of the West. It expands the Church’s evangelistic mission while simultaneously enabling widespread and effective political action. But how might such brotherhoods be structured in a way that is both practical and effective at the local, state, and federal levels?

At the local level, the purpose of the brotherhood is not explicitly political, but its activities would largely center on evangelism and the inculcation of Orthodox Christian values. A major part of its work would be the development of youth mentorship programs and catechetical formation; the production of pamphlets and apologetical works; and the fostering of community among Orthodox Christians within and across parishes in a given town, city, or county. Brotherhoods would also play a key role in ensuring that parish feast days are celebrated with both reverence and festivity; in raising funds to build churches and monastic habitations; and in providing assistance to struggling parishes and parishioners. In this way, the local brotherhoods retain their traditional form—with one important modern adaptation.

Each local brotherhood could form an associated 501(c)(4) organization, run by members of the brotherhood. This civil association would be legally capable of engaging in political activities, including issue education, grassroots lobbying, and policy advocacy, when necessary and in line with the laws surrounding such activities. Local brotherhoods would coordinate with others in their region to form a state-level federation of Orthodox brotherhoods, thus linking local efforts with broader organizational strength.

Though semi-independent of its local chapters, the state federations would operate with their input and support. A governing board would be established, with each local brotherhood assigning two representatives to participate in state business meetings. These meetings would determine the coordination of efforts across the state—mobilizing volunteers for tasks like rebuilding churches or assisting communities affected by natural disasters. Bishops and other clergy would be regularly invited to participate in these gatherings and to offer spiritual counsel. While structurally distinct from the Church hierarchy, the brotherhood should avoid any spirit of opposition or suspicion. Harmony and cooperation between clergy and laity should remain a guiding principle.

Likewise, while limited political activities would be carried out as necessary, the main focus of the state organization is still focused on the inculcation of Orthodox values in the community and spreading the Orthodox faith.

The operations of the state federation—also structured as a 501(c)(4)—would be funded through dues from local chapters, contributions from benefactors, and fundraising events. Its main aim would still remain philanthropic: organizing Orthodox youth camps, educational seminars on piety and evangelism, etc… Politically, the state federation would focus on raising awareness of issues affecting Orthodox Christians, grassroots lobbying of state legislators, and coordinating regional responses to emerging issues.

To deepen its political reach, high-trust members of the federation could establish a non-connected political action committee (PAC) under IRS code 527. As a non-connected PAC, it could raise funds from the general public, endorse candidates and ballot measures, produce persuasive literature and direct mail campaigns, and even hire full-time lobbyists to build relationships with key elected officials.

As these state federations mature, they would then form a national federation, composed of the chairmen and two elected representatives from each state-level organization.¹⁰ This national body would elect officers—a chairman, executive director, treasurer, secretary, and others—to serve set terms.

The national federation would have a dual mission: to further the Church’s evangelistic outreach through coordinated fundraising and action, and to serve as a permanent Orthodox presence in Washington, D.C. There it would educate, advise, and lobby high-ranking federal officials on the concerns of the Orthodox faithful, the vision of the brotherhoods, and the pursuit of both spiritual and material prosperity for all.

Another key function of the national organization would be the publishing of Orthodox homeschool curriculum and textbooks. These would be subsidized for parish co-ops whose church has a brotherhood affiliated with the organization. Likewise, a grant program would be created to support smaller co-ops, assist Orthodox schools and subsidize teacher pay to further the development of a wider educational project. This could then be duplicated at the state level.

Through this model, the faithful could organize and engage in political life in a meaningful and impactful way, while remaining rooted in the Church and her mission. The Church, in turn, could exert influence on the moral and political direction of the nation—without violating resolutions such as that issued by the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia in April 1993, which affirmed that the Church does not ally itself with political or social organizations. This brotherhood model preserves that principle, while empowering the laity to act effectively for the good of their country and the glory of God.

Conclusion

I understand that some—particularly among the clergy—have concerns about Orthodox Christians becoming involved in politics. They should. It is, after all, their responsibility to care for the spiritual well-being of the faithful. Historically, political institutions have often brutalized the Orthodox Church—and they continue to do so in many parts of the world. But the reality in which we live demands action.

Today, Evangelical lobbying groups are telling members of Congress that the persecution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is a fabrication—nothing more than Russian propaganda. Others openly support false claims by foreign militaries that churches they bomb are sheltering terrorists, or that Christians receive fair and equal treatment in certain parts of the Middle East. And yet, so long as Orthodox Christians refuse to organize brotherhoods, form PACs, build relationships with elected officials, raise public awareness, and produce competent voices in the media—those same Evangelical and other lobbyists will continue to dominate the political conversation in America. And we will remain powerless to prevent the tragedies we have witnessed in Ukraine, Serbia, Georgia, Syria, and the Holy Land.

There are signs, however, of a political awakening among Orthodox Christians in America. Some of our hierarchs have begun to speak publicly about the need for increased political visibility. Orthodox participation in political organizations is growing. The growth in the Young Republicans, for example, has led to discussions of forming an Orthodox Christian Caucus at the national level. Two PACs have recently emerged: the first, the so-called "Orthodox PAC," appears to be a more USAID-aligned group that consistently attacks the Russian Church. The second, the Christian Orthodox Coalition (COCUS), was more or less formed out of folks involved with Serbs for Trump and aims “to Educate, Empower, & Engage collective Christian Orthodox Voices in the cultural & social discourse as well as the civic process via the conservative virtues of our faith.”

These are important beginnings—but they are not enough.

It is up to us to do our part: to organize, to speak out against injustice, and to build institutions that will serve the faithful in this land. This duty falls on each of us—on every Orthodox Christian in the way we live, in how we relate to our neighbor and our nation—and also at the communal level, by working together to organize and secure a future for our children, and for Orthodoxy in America.

Whether or not Saint Paisius the Athonite’s prophecy comes true—that “one day, America will be holy”—depends on us. I believe a national network of brotherhoods could be a powerful vehicle for bringing this to fruition.

Stay tuned.

1. Fr. Zakaria Machitadze; The Lives of Georgian Saints, p. 37; St. Herman Press

2. Ibid., p. 39

3. Ibid., p. 40

4. Fr. Zakaria Machitadze; The Lives of Georgian Saints, p. 270

5. St. Athanasius Parios; Apology for Christianity, p. XXVI; New Rome Press, 2025

6. Life of St. Theodosius, Archbishop of Chernigov; Orthodox Patristic Witness Concerning Catholicism; Uncut Mountain Press

7. Fr. George Calciu; Interviews, Homilies, and Talks, p. 134–135; St. Herman Press

8. Ibid.

9. The perpetual risk to all good works this side of the Dread Judgment. Such turns are avoided through humility and repentance, not giving in to hate when we are slandered and persecuted.

10. Alternatively, with the right funding, the national organization could be created first and run seminars and mentorship on the establishment of Orthodox Brotherhoods across the country. This centralized effort has proven effective for many political organizations across the country.