Page 334 - Orthodoxy Zizioulas

O r t h o d o x y
came “to His own,” and yet “His own did not receive Him.” The
acceptance of history did not lead to absorption by history.
Thus the Church, though incarnate in history, must not forget
that she “has no abiding city here, but seeks the one to come.”
Ease, security, worldly honor, and glory do not belong to her
nature. If her Lord was crucified, she too must remain crucified
in history. It is one thing for the Church to influence history, and
another to seek glory within it. Her true influence lies precisely
in her kenotic and cruciform witness—a witness that forms a
kind of human being who does not rest in this world, but seeks
its transformation.
All this means that the Church must, at all costs, avoid secu-
larization.
Secularization consists in the absolutization of the forms of
history—those realities that come and pass, such as nations,
states, and social institutions. The Church does not reject these
forms, but she breathes into them an eschatological spirit, reveal-
ing their relativity and drawing from them whatever is destined
to endure. Secularization is therefore not simply a matter of
method, but of spirit and mentality. It is not enough for the
Church to avoid using worldly means; she must also avoid pur-
suing worldly aims, as though she herself belonged “to this
world.”
This question becomes particularly acute in our time with the
rapid development of technology. What happens when the
Church adopts the means of modern communication—such as
the internet? Should she use them? And how can she avoid secu-
larization while doing so?
A common answer is that the end sanctifies the means—that
technology is neutral in itself, provided it is used for good pur-
poses. But is any medium truly neutral? Can it be said, for ex-
ample, that television is good when it transmits a sacred service,
334