That Tone of Voice

Effective communication is a matter not simply of chosen words but also of how those words are spoken—i.e. of the tone of voice used when speaking.  As C. S. Lewis once observed, “In civilised life domestic hatred usually expresses itself by saying things which would appear quite harmless on paper (the words are not offensive) but in such a voice that they are not far short of a blow in the face” (from his The Screwtape Letters, chapter 3).  Tone of voice therefore is very important and can be even more important than actual words used.

       It is possible to have many tones of voice.  One’s tone can be sarcastic and cutting; it can be soft and gentle.  When it is the former it can sometimes bring the rebuke, “Don’t you use that tone with me!” Everyone knows this, either because they have been subjected to such a rebuke or have been the one giving it.  Or, more usually, both.  (I pause to note in passing that tone of voice is lacking in email and text messages.  Emojis then try to provide a kind of inadequate substitute.  All the more reason to opt for face-to-face communication whenever possible and not rely on texting.)

       Using tone of voice as an analogy, I suggest that Orthodoxy can be present in many different tones of voice. 

       For example, one can present Orthodoxy as speaking with an ecumenical tone of voice, always careful to stress the commonalities it shares with other Christian denominations and to express appreciation for them.  It will be careful not to offend or bluntly contradict those denominations or pick fights with them.  (An example of such a tone of voice in the Roman Catholic Church was that of the late Dr. Margaret O’Gara, a dedicated Catholic ecumenist I knew during the days of my Arts degree.  She died too young. May her memory be eternal!)  

Those using this tone of voice will usually select discussion topics which will provide fodder for agreement and will avoid controversial subjects whenever possible.  Such tones of voice are sometimes de rigueur when participating in ecumenical conferences and adopting other theological tones of voice will usually get you barred from participation in future conferences—or at least limit your access to the wine and cheese.

       Alternately one can find an Orthodoxy that uses a cutting tone of voice, a tone with a pronounced edge to it.  This is often the kind of Orthodoxy one finds in Facebook “exchanges” (i.e. fights with strangers), in blogs, in online discussion groups.  This tone of voice is the polar opposite of the ecumenical tone of voice.  It delights to pick fights and to highlight in the other churches things that are obviously wrong, bizarre, or exceptional.  It rarely subjects them to insightful and nuanced analysis but prefers rather to laugh and jeer.

For those using this tone of voice, extended civil dialogue is “out” and caricature of the other is “in”. Polemics is its native tongue and it is loathe to admit to any hint of insight, holiness, or goodness in the other traditions.  Its bookstores are full of books denouncing other churches.  Multi-valent complexities are steam-rollered flat and eliminated.  This kind of Orthodoxy has judgementalism in its DNA and is always on the lookout to detect what is wrong in another, even if it has to use a microscope to find it.

It seems to me that this latter tone of voice among some Orthodox is a comparatively recent phenomenon. I suspect that this is so because it needs a certain amount of anonymity to flourish and this anonymity can best (or only) be found online.  People posting online commonly allow themselves a degree of rudeness that they would never use in face-to-face discussions or even over the phone. 

That is why most online debates never resolve anything for they are rarely true dialogues but only monologues where two people are speaking past each other—usually loudly and impolitely.  In real life face-to-face debates are conducted with civility—except, of course, at demonstrations where shouting slogans and waving signs take the place of actual communication (or, come to that, of actual thought).

In an earlier day, Orthodoxy used a calmer and more respectful tone of voice when it made pronouncements, explained itself, and discussed differences with other Christian traditions.  Admittedly most of those traditions have changed dramatically from what they were a generation or so ago (the Anglican Church, for example, has morphed almost out of recognition) but these changes cannot by themselves account for the new tone of voice among some Orthodox.

To give an example: in an earlier day in America it was a common thing for Orthodox bishops to tell their ethnic faithful that if they couldn’t find an Orthodox church nearby to attend, they should attend the nearest Anglican church (we note that this did not necessarily include communing in the Anglican church since at that time non-communicating attendance, as it is called, was the Orthodox norm.) 

Indeed, in some circles in Great Britain one Orthodox theologian (Fr. Sergei Bulgakov) put forward suggestion that there even be a limited inter-communion between Orthodox and Anglicans during the conferences of the Fellowship of St. Alban and St. Sergius.  This suggestion was (thankfully, to my mind) not followed, but it is a sign of how little polemical rancour existed between the Orthodox and the other Christian traditions.

It is all about striking a balance.  A confident and calm Orthodoxy will hold steadfastly to its traditional faith, not being blown about by every wind of secular doctrine.  It will keep to the royal way of the Fathers, combining their mindset with modern scholarship and interaction with the modern world, which includes interacting respectfully with other Christian traditions. It will witness to its apostolic deposit and encourage all Christians—and indeed everyone—to return to the unity of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. 

But it will not slide into strident polemics, denouncing and damning everything outside its canonical boundaries as if everything tous exo was of the same undifferentiated darkness.  It will resist the temptation to be afraid of contamination as the Pharisees were afraid, pulling up the drawbridge and filling the moat, taking refuge in Czarist Holy Russia or Imperial Byzantium. Adopting such a tone of voice and way of living tends to transform the Church into a cult, its temples into museums. It would have the effect of hiding the light of the world under a polemical bushel.

Tone of voice matters in communication.  And a theological tone of voice matters even more in the life of the Church. Christ calls us to go forward into the world, interacting with it, discerning its errors, offering help, modelling a different way of living.  The living God dwells among us and He calls all His world into union with Him.  Faithfulness to Him means finding the proper balance and using a tone of voice with which the Lord would be pleased as we present His truth to the world.