The "Theotokos of Vladimir" icon (12th century)

Look up orthodox in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

The word orthodox is from Greek ὀρθός ("right", "correct", "true", "straight") + δοξία (from "δόξα", meaning "glory").^[1] In English, this term is often mistranslated to mean "right opinion", as "doxia" is mistaken to come from "dokein" (meaning "to think"). 'Orthodox', in the English sense, is generally used to mean the adherence to accepted norms, more specifically to creeds, especially in religion.[2] It usually refers to "conventions". However, "orthodox", in its original sense, refers to those who keep the faith of the original church: the Orthodox Church. "Orthodox" then refers to the people of the first church, who "give correct (straight) glory to God." But though retaining the original faith, Orthodox worldly life differs in some aspects from the original customs of the Bible. Orthodox Churches in Slavic-language countries (Macedonia, Russia, Serbia, Bulgaria, etc.) use a word derived from Old Church Slavonic, Правосла́виѥ (pravosláviye) to mean orthodoxy. The word derives from the Slavonic roots "право" (právo, true, right) and "славить" (slávit, to praise, to glorify), in effect meaning "the right way to praise God".

The term did not exist in the English sense in which it is now used prior to the advent of the state church of the Roman Empire.^[2] Orthodoxy is opposed to heterodoxy ("other teaching"), heresy and schism. People who deviate from orthodoxy by professing a doctrine considered to be false are most often called heretics or radicals, while those who deviate from orthodoxy by removing themselves from the perceived body of believers are called schismatics. The distinction in terminology pertains to the subject matter; if one is addressing corporate unity, the emphasis may be on schism; if one is addressing doctrinal coherence, the emphasis may be on heresy.

Apostasy, for example, is a violation of orthodoxy that takes the form of abandonment of the faith, a concept largely unknown before the adoption of Christianity as the state religion of Rome on February 27, 380 by Theodosius I (see also First seven Ecumenical Councils and State church of the Roman Empire). A lighter deviation from orthodoxy than heresy is commonly called error, in the sense of not being grave enough to cause total estrangement, while yet seriously affecting communion. Sometimes error is also used to cover both full heresies and minor errors.

The concept of orthodoxy is the most prevalent in many forms of organized monotheism, but orthodox belief is not usually overly emphasized in polytheistic or animist religions. Often there is little to no concept of dogma, and varied interpretation of doctrine and theology is tolerated and sometimes even encouraged within certain contexts. Syncretism, for example, plays a much wider role in non-monotheistic (and particularly, non-scriptural) religion. The prevailing governing idea within polytheism is most often orthopraxy ("right practice") rather than "right belief".

Groups[link]

The term "orthodox" originated in the Orthodox Church, and was later used also by the Oriental Orthodox. Protestant denominations like the Orthodox Presbyterian Church use this term in its English sense, to differentiate from those they deem heretic. Orthodox Judaism focuses on a strict adherence to what it sees as the correct interpretation of the Oral Torah, but the Greek-based word "orthodox" was not applied to Jews until the 19th century, long after it was applied to Christians, and some traditional Jewish groups^[who?] still prefer not to use it.

Christianity[link]

In classical Christian usage, the term orthodox refers to a set of doctrines which gained prominence in the 4th century AD. The Roman Emperor Constantine I initiated a series of Ecumenical Councils, also known as the First seven Ecumenical Councils, to try to standardize the then diverse thought found among Early Christians. The most significant of these early debates was that between the Homoousian doctrine of Athanasius and Eustathius (which became Trinitarianism) and the Heteroousian doctrine of Arius and Eusebius (called Arianism). The Homoousian doctrine, which eventually defined Jesus as both God and man with the Hypostatic union of the 451 Council of Chalcedon, gradually won out in the Byzantine Church and came to be referred to as orthodoxy in most Christian contexts, since this became the viewpoint of the majority. (The minority Non-Trinitarian Christians object to this terminology).

Following the 1054 Great Schism, both the Western and Eastern churches continued to consider themselves uniquely orthodox and catholic. Over time the Western church gradually identified with the "Catholic" label and people of Western Europe gradually associated the "Orthodox" label with the Eastern church (in some languages the "Catholic" label is not necessarily identified with the Western church). In addition, there is a separate Oriental Orthodox communion, as well as other smaller communions that are commonly classified as "Orthodox".

The altar area of an Orthodox church.

Both the Eastern Orthodox Church and Oriental Orthodoxy use (with a small difference in plural/singular form of the verbs "we believe", "we confess", "we await") the original form of the Nicene Creed developed at the First Council of Constantinople in 381, referred to as the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed.^[3][4] In contrast, the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant churches of western Christianity add the phrases "God from God" and "and the Son" (see Filioque clause), and the Armenian Apostolic Church has many more additions.^[5] The addition of "and the Son" was (along with the Papal supremacy and some other questions) one of the causes for the East–West Schism formalized in 1054 by simultaneous proclamations of "Anathema" by the Bishop of Rome (Pope) in the West and the leadership of the Orthodox Churches (Patriarch) in the East.

Late 14th-early 15th century icon illustrating the "Triumph of Orthodoxy" under the Byzantine empress Theodora over iconoclasm. Patriarch Methodios I of Constantinople is on the top right, close to the Virgin.

Aphoristically said, "The Orthodox Church is evangelical, but not Protestant. It’s orthodox, but not Jewish. It’s catholic, but not Roman. It isn’t non-denominational – it’s pre-denominational. It has believed, taught, preserved, defended and died for the Faith of the Apostles since the day of Pentecost 2000 years ago." ^[6][7]

Since the Second Vatican Council (1962-5), changes in the Roman Catholic Church have led to a gradual "rapprochement" between Catholic Rome and Orthodoxy at the official level. The institutions' simultaneous revocations of the anathemas of 1054 were a gesture toward "restoring mutual trust" and a recognition that there is "a vast area of common ground that the two sides share." Regarding dogma, Orthodox often believe that

"Latin scholastic theology makes too much use of legal concepts, and relies too heavily on rational categories and syllogistic argumentation, while the Catholics for their part have frequently found the more mystical approach of Orthodoxy too vague and ill-defined." There are also "psychological barriers [in Eastern Europe] that need to be overcome."^[8]

For example, in 2008, Patriarch Alexi of All Russia complained about the presence of Catholic clerics and missionaries in Russia, noting, "If they consider Orthodoxy to have just as much the grace of God and salvation as Catholicism, then what is the point of persistent attempts to convert people to the other faith?" ^[9] The Russian Church, for example, in a gesture of good will, does not demand that Roman Catholics "receive Chrismation" when they convert to Orthodoxy, but allows a simple profession of faith ("though Anglican and other Protestants are always received by Chrismation").^[10]

The legalism and political power that has shaped Catholicism, as well as the total authority of the Pope, contrasts the Orthodox Church, who keep the doctrine that their Faith is "not of this world."

The Orthodox believe that among the original five Patriarchs and ancient Patriarchates (i.e., Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem), a "primacy of honor" waits for Rome, not of supremacy.^[11] To use an Orthodox apostolic term, if the Pope were to return to the Church, he would become "first among equals". To disassociate the "See of Rome" from this "equalisation," Pope Benedict XVI recently dropped the title "Patriarch of the West," as he considered the designation as an attempt to Orientalize Western ecclesiology (or adopt Orthodox terms).^[12] Benedict still considers the five Sees, dating back to the first millennium, to be "Sister Churches within a certain ecumenical context.^[13]

The Roman Catholic Church believes that Papal Supremacy was set forth by Jesus, in Matthew 16:13-19:

'Who do men say that the Son of man is?' And they said, 'Some say John the Baptists, others say Elijah; and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.' He said to them, 'But who do you say that I am?' Simon Peter replied, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God.' and Jesus answered him, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father Who is in Heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.'

In contrast, the Orthodox understand Christ's words as referring to all apostles, and His promise as an inheritance to all who confess the same belief. More specifically, they understand Jesus to be addressing Peter's faith (his confession of belief) as being the Rock upon which His Church would be built. This is allegedly shown by the fact that the original Greek uses the feminine demonstrative pronoun when he says "upon this rock" (ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ); whereas, grammatically, if Jesus had been referring to Peter, he would allegedly have used the masculine.^[14] Therefore, in the Orthodox Church, Papal Supremacy and infallibility is not a declaration by Christ.

Some Greek Catholics in Ukraine, Romania, Lebanon, and Syria, worship according to the Byzantine rite but follow the primacy of the Pope. In the 17th and 18th Centuries, changes such as nationalism and threats of attack forced many of these Eastern Catholic Churches to accept being led by the politically strong Roman Catholic Church, who promised them aid if they would only convert. Similarly, national rulers sympathetic to Catholicism often led this change. Most such churches follow liturgical practices identical to those of the Orthodox Church.

Today, the term "Western Orthodox" is applied to groups of Orthodox Christians in the United Kingdom, the United States and such western European countries as Denmark, Finland, France, Germany and the Netherlands. With the consent of their bishops, they use a Western rite, and often a Western calendar. This movement is similar to that of Eastern Catholicism, though it is smaller and more recent, and not organized along national lines.^{[citation needed]}

The term Oriental Orthodoxy is used to refer to non-Chalcedonian eastern Christians. This is in contrast to members of the Eastern Orthodox Church, who accept the Council of Chalcedon (See Ecumenical Councils) and generally worship according to the Byzantine Rite. Those identified as Oriental Orthodox have traditionally been referred to as Monophysites. They are found in Egypt, Ethiopia, some parts of Syria, Iraq and Iran, Armenia, and southern India in Kerala State. They accept only the first three of the ecumenical councils.

Since the early twentieth century, some rapproachment has taken place between these and the Eastern Orthodox Churches, particularly in Syria. Dialogue among the group's representatives have resulted in statements that their longstanding differences have been of phraseology all along, and a simple misunderstanding by each side of what each church represents. Eastern Orthodox leaders do not find this entirely satisfactory; in addition, they hold that it is not within each church's competence to use a General Holy Synod to bring about communion. Such Eastern Orthodox Christians hold that it would take another Great and Holy Council of every Eastern Orthodox Bishop together to reverse the Anathema, a considerable obstacle.^{[citation needed]}

The longstanding Christian institutions described above consider developments in Christianity since the nineteenth century to be unorthodox (or cults). They include within that category Unitarians, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons), Jehovah's Witnesses, and some of the more radical forms of Liberal Christianity.

Each of the major ecclesiastical communities continue to evaluate and grapple with issues that they believe are an estrangement or refinements of perceived orthodoxy. For example, the Roman See often issues recommendations as to what worship practices it considers orthodox so as to curb excesses or deficiencies by its prelates. Some evangelicals are pursuing innovations that more conservative evangelicals consider unorthodox. The latter refer to the changes as "neo-evangelical", "neo-pentecostal," or "fringe Charismatic."

See also[link]

• Belief in Jesus
• Heresy
• Neo-orthodoxy
• Orthodox Church
• Paleo-orthodoxy
• Proto-orthodox Christianity
• Theology

References[link]

John Behr (born October 16, 1966) is a contemporary Eastern Orthodox priest and theologian, and Dean of St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary, where he teaches Patristics . He was ordained to the diaconate on September 8, 2001 (the feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos) and the priesthood on September 14, 2001 (the feast of the Exaltation of the Cross). Behr was previously the editor of the Popular Patristic Series released by St. Vladimir's Press. He was elected Dean of the seminary on November 18, 2006 and began his term as Dean on July 1, 2007.^[1]

Biography[link]

Behr completed his undergraduate studies at Thames Polytechnic, London, in 1987. His Bachelor of Arts dissertation was entitled Of God, Man, and Creation: A Comparative Study of the Anthropology of the Greek Fathers and Emmanuel Levinas. Having studied under Bishop Kallistos (Ware), Behr earned his Master of Philosophy in 1991 and Doctor of Philosophy degrees in Theology from Oxford University in 1995. Remnants of his master's thesis, Sexuality, Marriage, and Asceticism in Second-Century Christian Writings can be found in his doctoral dissertation published in 2000 by Oxford University Press under the title Asceticism and Anthropology in Irenaeus and Clement. Behr completed a Master of Theology from St Vladimir's in 1997, where he had already been teaching on a full-time basis for two years. His thesis, a complete textual criticism of On the Apostolic Preaching by Irenaeus of Lyons, was subsequently published by St. Vladimir's Seminary Press.

Works[link]

The Way to Nicaea

Behr's first major work, The Way to Nicaea, published in 2001, follows early Christian reflection beginning with the Scriptural Christ and continuing through to the Council of Antioch. This first of three volumes primarily consist of the examination of certain theologians: Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus of Lyons, Hippolytus of Rome and the Roman Debates, Origen and Alexandria, and Paul of Samosata and the Council of Antioch. Beginning a pattern continued in his second volume, Behr provides a short biographical sketch of each, and then focuses on their works and the controversies they were engaged in. Neither a comprehensive history of theology nor a compendium of Christian doctrine, Behr instead draws attention to the theological debates and reflections that led up to the First Council of Nicaea.

Because the answer to a question can only be provided by its meaning, Behr begins with the question Christ himself asks, "Who do you say I am?" This answer, while provided by the Gospel, requires reflection—interpretation and explanation of this very person of Jesus Christ, his life and works. The writings of the New Testament, written from an interpretative confession of the crucified and risen Christ contemplated through Scripture, were the subject of intense debate and formation, eventually finding their normative foundation by the end of the 2nd century. According to Behr, this background is not only necessary for understanding later theological debates, but it is crucial to understanding those boundaries that identify Jesus Christ. It is the unique Jesus Christ-crucified on a cross, buried, risen three days later-contemplated through the texture of Scripture-the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets-who is revealed as the Son of God. The incarnation, then, is not the single moment in which something began but rather a recapitulation—the same presence of the same word. It is through the Word of God previously hidden in the Scripture, as preached by the Apostles, revealed by the Holy Spirit, that the invisible, incomprehensible Father is made visible and comprehensible by the crucified and risen Jesus Christ. It is he who is always the Coming One, whom through continual contemplation and immersion in Scripture, devotion and death in his name, allows us to participate in the fullness of God.

The Nicene Faith

Released in 2004, The Nicene Faith examines the theological reflection of the 4th century, beginning with the church shaking debates that led to Council of Nicaea and ending with their resolution at the Council of Constantinople. Like its predecessor, The Nicene Faith is structured not only chronologically, but according theme, examining of only certain theologians-Athanasius, Basil of Cesarea, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Gregory of Nyssa. Adapting a similar approach to The Way to Nicaea, this volume is neither a complete collection of theological discourses nor does it have a sole focus, such as Trinitarian theology. Rather, The Nicene Faith traces the development of theological reflection in the 4th century—Athanasius and the Cappadocians expounding their vision, preparing the path for the councils of Nicaea and Constantinople, providing the proper context in which their creeds can be correctly understood. One simply cannot reduce the results of these debates into shorthand formulae.

Key to understanding Behr’s approach, the introduction, standing outside of the main body of work, explains the need to scrutinize our inherently flawed perspectives and presuppositions regarding 4th century theology. An awareness of this 21st century understanding of such terms as “orthodoxy”, “Incarnation,” and “Trinitarian” theology recognizes that we speak these terms with 1,600 years of definitions already read into them, rather than how the authors themselves used these words within their own texts.

The Nicene Faith both discusses and reflects upon Athanasius and the Cappadocians’ exegetical principles and subsequently derived theology, specifically within the context of the controversies upon which this was forced. Thus, leading to a further, more carefully worded engagement with Scripture, once again seeking to answer the same question that led the way to Nicaea, Christ’s “Who do you say that I am?”

Nicene faith is, then, a particular confession, revealing the power of God, responding to Christ and the Spirit, concerning the God whom they reveal as the Father. It is the transformation fashioned in and by Christ that propels all theological contemplation. It provides the lens through which one understands his Passion. When Christ dies as a human being, he demonstrates his divinity as God—he raises his own body. God’s power is found in human weakness—the form of a servant transforms into the form of the Lord—revealing not inferiority but true divinity and equality. It is as the crucified one that glory is both received and revealed—the same glory which he shared with the Father from all eternity, by which there is no other. This revelation, the cornerstone of all Christian theology, through which God is made known, is located solely on the Cross. The one who was creator is the one who now renews. It is the Passion, the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word of God, illumined by and through the Cross, Christ’s voluntary bodily death and resurrection, through which those who have put on his faith, now live in Christ and continue to demonstrate his victory.

The Mystery of Christ

The Mystery of Christ is a systematic presentation of theology that emerged from Behr’s first two volumes, The Way to Nicaea and The Nicene Faith. A break from The Formation of Christian Theology series, the book provides a vision of Christian theology that challenges the reader to rethink the modern historical approach to theology—a discipline that has become ever more fragmented in its study.

Once again returning to the earlier witnesses, Behr begins with the way in which the disciples came to know Jesus Christ as the Son of God—through the Cross and the manner in which the Passion was interpreted and proclaimed. This revelation does not occur in light of the Passion, but when the risen Christ himself directs the disciples to the scriptures. The text of the Old Testament, previously viewed as a narrative of the past, is revealed as a thesaurus of imagery, with the historical event of the Passion as its starting point. It is Christ, not scripture, who is exegeted. The crucified and risen Lord standing before them is the one of whom the scriptures have always spoken— the one who is still the Coming One.

Given this perspective, Behr continues by explaining how the results of the theological debates of the first four centuries—particularly Trinitarian theology and Christology—have become separated from the way in which they were exegetically formed and articulated. Within this structure he considers questions of canon and tradition. How is it that we speak of creation and salvation today? How is the “Fall” (mis)understood? This is crucial, not only regarding the narrative of salvation history, but more importantly how we understand our own lives. Additionally, Behr examines how Mary is spoken of in the Gospels and liturgical texts—both the nativity and the Virgin Mother as the church. Finally, he focuses on theme of incarnation, which upon interpretation presents the body as that through which Christians are to glorify God.

In the carefully worded postscript, Behr provides further attention to modern theology’s paradigmatic shift away from the exegetical methods from which early Christian doctrine was originally elaborated. Today's starting points are conclusions without arguments that have resulted in ambiguity. Much of our theology now works within a modern historical framework, recounting the interaction between God as Trinity and the world. With a Trinity as a starting point, the linear movement proceeds to retell the creation story, our time in Eden, and the Fall of Man as a historical moment in history. Thus begins salvation history, the second person of the Trinity—the pre-incarnate Logos—revealing himself to Abraham, conversing with Moses, and speaking through the Prophets. This culminates in the incarnation of one of the Trinity, who then returns to the Father, sends the Holy Spirit to guide the church for the rest of humankind until the second coming, which is the literal, definable end of the time-line. This popular modern trend which seeks the reality of history—how things really occurred as a neutral statement—ignores the recognition that history is an interpretation of past events. Instead of interpretation and confession, theology has become a fusion of metaphysics and mythology.

Bibliography[link]

• St Athanasius: On the Incarnation, trans. SVS Press 2012 (ISBN 978-0-88141-409-7)
• The Case Against Diodore and Theodore, Oxford University Press 2011 (ISBN 978-0-19-956987-8)
• The Mystery of Christ: Life in Death, SVS Press, 2006. (ISBN 0-88141-306-2)
• The Nicene Faith (Formation of Christian Theology, V.2), SVS Press, 2004. (ISBN 0-88141-267-8)
• The Way to Nicaea (The Formation of Christian Theology, V. 1), SVS Press, 2001. (ISBN 0-88141-224-4)
• Asceticism and Anthropology in Irenaeus and Clement, Oxford University Press, 2000 (ISBN 978-0-19-827000-3 ISBN 0-19-827000-3) (Behr's Oxford doctoral thesis.)
• On the Apostolic Preaching, trans. SVS Press, 1997 (ISBN 0-88141-174-4, ISBN 978-0-88141-174-4) (Behr's Master of Theology from St Vladimir's.)

Criticism[link]

A criticism of Behr's theological project, and his alleged dismissal of the theology of Metropolitan John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon, is found in Alan Brown, 'On the Criticism of Being as Communion in Anglophone Orthodox Theology', in Douglas Knight (ed.), The Theology of John Zizioulas: Personhood and the Church (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2007), 35-78.

References[link]

External links[link]

• Curriculum Vitae
• Inaugural address as Dean of Saint Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary

Frank Schaeffer (born August 3, 1952) is an American author, film director, screenwriter and public speaker. He is the son of the late theologian and author Francis Schaeffer. He became a Hollywood film director and author, writing several internationally acclaimed novels depicting life in a strict fundamentalist household including Portofino, Zermatt, and Saving Grandma.

Background[link]

In 1990 Schaeffer became an Orthodox Christian as a member of the Orthodox Church, which he says "embraces paradox and mystery".^{[citation needed]} He converted in 1992 at a Greek Orthodox Church in Newburyport, MA.

In 2006 he published Baby Jack, a novel about a marine killed in Iraq. He is also known for his best-selling non-fiction books related to the United States Marine Corps, including Keeping Faith—A Father-Son Story About Love and the United States Marine Corps, co-written with his son John Schaeffer, and AWOL—The Unexcused Absence Of America's Upper Classes From Military Service and How It Hurts Our Country, co-authored with former Clinton presidential aide Kathy Roth-Douquet.

In 2007 Schaeffer published his autobiography, Crazy for God: How I Grew Up As One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back, in which he goes into much more detail regarding what it was like to grow up in the Schaeffer family and around L'Abri. In 2011, he published another memoir called Sex, Mom, and God, in which he discusses growing up with his parents and their role in the rise of the American religious right and argues that the root of the "insanity and corruption" of this force in U.S. politics, and specifically of the religious right's position on abortion, is a fear of female sexuality.^[2]

Political views[link]

Schaeffer has written: "In the mid 1980s I left the Religious Right, after I realized just how very anti-American they are, (the theme I explore in my book Crazy For God)."^[3] He added that he was a Republican until 2000, working for Senator John McCain in that year's primaries, but that after the 2000 election he re-registered as an independent.^[3]

On February 7, 2008, Schaeffer endorsed Senator Barack Obama for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, in an article entitled "Why I'm Pro-Life and Pro-Obama."^[4] The next month, prompted by the controversy over remarks by the pastor of Obama's church, he wrote: "[W]hen my late father -- Religious Right leader Francis Schaeffer -- denounced America and even called for the violent overthrow of the US government, he was invited to lunch with presidents Ford, Reagan and Bush, Sr."^[5] Schaeffer based this claim on statements that supporters of the elder Schaeffer contend were taken out of context from his father's work "A Christian Manifesto." After the 2008 Russian-Georgian War, Schaeffer described Russia as a resurgent Orthodox Christian power, paying back the West for its support of Muslim Kosovar secessionists against Orthodox Serbia.^[6]

On October 10, 2008, a public letter to Senator McCain (and Sarah Palin) from Schaeffer was published in the Baltimore Sun newspaper.^[7] The letter contained an impassioned plea for John McCain to arrest what Schaeffer perceived as a hateful, and prejudiced tone of the Republican party's election campaign. Schaeffer was convinced that there was a pronounced danger that fringe groups in America could be goaded into pursuing violence. "If you do not stand up for all that is good in America and declare that Senator Obama is a patriot, fit for office, and denounce your hate-filled supporters ... history will hold you responsible for all that follows."^[7]

Soon after Obama's inauguration, Schaeffer criticized Republican leaders for the course on which they had taken his former party:

How can anyone who loves our country support the Republicans now? Barry Goldwater, William F. Buckley and Ronald Reagan defined the modern conservatism that used to be what the Republican Party I belonged to was about. Today no actual conservative can be a Republican. Reagan would despise today's wholly negative Republican Party.^[3]

In February, 2010, Schaeffer accused President Obama's critics of being racist.^[8]

Books[link]

• Sex, Mom, and God: How the Bible's Strange Take on Sex Led to Crazy Politics—and How I Learned to Love Women (and Jesus) Anyway, Cambridge: Da Capo Press, 2011. ISBN 978-0-306-81928-5
• Patience with God: Faith for People Who Don't Like Religion (or Atheism), Cambridge: Da Capo Press, 2009. ISBN 978-0-306-81854-7
• How Free People Move Mountains: A Male Christian Conservative and a Female Jewish Liberal on a Quest for Common Purpose and Meaning (with Kathy Roth-douquet), New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2008. ISBN 978-0-06-123352-4
• Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back, New York: Carol & Graf Publishers, (September) 2007. ISBN 978-0-7867-1891-7
• Baby Jack: A Novel, New York: Carol & Graf Publishers, (October) 2006.
• AWOL: The Unexcused Absence of America's Upper Classes from Military Service—and How It Hurts Our Country (with Kathy Roth-Douquet), New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2006. ISBN 978-0-06-088859-6
• Voices From the Front: Letters Home From American's Military Family, New York: Carol & Graf Publishers, 2004. (Third of Military Trilogy) ISBN 978-0-7867-1462-9
• Faith of Our Sons: Voices From the American Homefront — The Wartime Diary of a Marine's Father, New York: Carol & Graf Publishers, 2004. (Second of Military Trilogy)
• Zermatt: A Novel, New York: Carol & Graf Publishers, 2003. (Third of Calvin Becker Trilogy) ISBN 978-0-7867-1259-5
• Keeping Faith: A Father-Son Story About Love and the U.S. Marine Corps (with son John Schaeffer), New York: Carol & Graf Publishers, 2002. (First of Military Trilogy)
• Saving Grandma: A Novel, New York: Berkley Books, 1997. (Second of Calvin Becker Trilogy)
• Letters to Father Aristotle, Salisbury, MA:Regina Orthodox Press, 1995.
• Dancing Alone: The Quest for Orthodox Faith in the Age of False Religion, Brookline, MA: Holy Cross, 1994.
• Portofino: A Novel, New York: Macmillan, 1992. (First of Calvin Becker Trilogy) ISBN 978-0-7867-1716-3
• Sham Pearls For Real Swine, Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1990.
• Is Capitalism Christian? (Editor), Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1985. ISBN 978-0-89107-362-8
• Bad News For Modern Man as Franky Schaeffer, Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1984.
• A Modest Proposal (with Harold Fickett), Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1984.
• A Time For Anger: The Myth of Neutrality, Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1982.
• Addicted to Mediocrity: 20th Century Christians and the Arts, Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1982.

Films[link]

• Baby on Board (1992). Slapstick comedy starring Judge Reinhold and Carol Kane.
• Rebel Storm (1990). Futuristic action film starring Zach Galligan and June Chadwick.
• Headhunter (1989). Occult horror film starring John Fatooh, June Chadwick, and Steve Kanaly.
• Wired to Kill (1986). Post-apocalyptic action film starring Devin Hoelscher, and with Merritt Butrick.
• Whatever Happened to the Human Race? (1979). A Christian response to abortion, euthanasia, and infanticide, narrated by Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop; it was released with a book by the same title.
• How Should We Then Live? The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture (1976). Frank Schaeffer produced his father Francis Schaeffer's critically acclaimed film series on the rise and decline of Western culture from a Christian viewpoint; it was released with a book by the same title.

See also[link]

• Crazy for God (expression)
• Republican and conservative support for Barack Obama in 2008

References[link]

External links[link]

• Official Frank Schaeffer website
• Francis Schaeffer at the Internet Movie Database
• Frank Schaeffer entry at Orthodoxwiki.org
• Interview with Schaeffer and Kathy Roth-Douquet on AWOL at the Pritzker Military Library
• Interview with Schaeffer by Krys Boyd on Crazy for God at KERA public radio.
• Interview with Schaeffer by Steve Lawson at Greenbelt.
• Fathers and Sons—On Francis Schaeffer, Frank Schaeffer, and Crazy for God Critical review by Os Guinness, Books and Culture, Christianity Today.