Paul Ladouceur

This article offers an in-depth study of the phenomenon of anti-ecumenism within the contemporary Orthodox world. Paul Ladouceur examines the historical and theological origins of this exclusivist stance, which regards the Orthodox Church as the sole custodian of salvation. The author analyzes the various current manifestations of this movement and sets out its doctrinal foundations. The article highlights the tensions running through the Orthodox world on the question of relations with other Christian confessions. Beyond the diagnosis, the theologian examines the conditions for a renewed reflection on ecclesial unity and its practical implications. This contribution offers a well-documented perspective on a major debate in contemporary Orthodox ecclesiology, enabling readers to understand the theological and ecclesial issues underlying the internal divisions within Orthodoxy in the face of ecumenical engagement.

This article focuses on Georges Florovsky's contribution to the renewal of Orthodox theology in the twentieth century. It takes the form of a lecture delivered by Florovsky in 1968 at the University of Aix-en-Provence, during a philosophy colloquium, accompanied by an introduction by Paul Ladouceur. The main idea developed by Florovsky concerns the necessity of a return to patristic sources as the foundation of an authentic Orthodox theological renewal, in critical dialogue with Western philosophical and intellectual modernity. From a theological and historical standpoint, this text constitutes a document of primary importance for understanding the thought of one of the most influential Orthodox theologians of the last century, particularly his conception of "neopatrism" as a path for the regeneration of Orthodox theology in the face of contemporary challenges.

This article examines the ecclesiological tensions within contemporary Orthodoxy, particularly in the context of ecumenical dialogue. Paul Ladouceur adopts an analytical and critical approach to study the neo-traditionalist current, characterized by a radical anti-ecumenism that refuses to recognize any sacramental validity in other Christian Churches. The main idea is that this position presents deep theological inconsistencies, particularly with regard to the question of the salvation of non-Orthodox Christians. In response, the author defends a mysteriological and apophatic ecclesiology, according to which the boundaries of the Church remain known to God alone and cannot be defined exclusively by human criteria. The theological contribution of the article lies in highlighting the limitations of Orthodox neo-traditionalism and in proposing a more open and theologically coherent ecclesiological alternative.

This historical study examines the intellectual and personal relationship between two major figures of twentieth-century Orthodox theology, Sergius Bulgakov (1871-1944) and Georges Florovsky (1893-1979), both professors at the Saint Sergius Institute in Paris during the interwar period. Drawing on extensive documentation, Paul Ladouceur traces over a period of some twenty years the tensions and convergences between the promoter of sophiology and the father of the neo-patristic synthesis. The article highlights the role of Russian diaspora networks, in particular the Saint Sophia brotherhood and the Saint Photius brotherhood, in supporting and structuring these theological debates. The main contribution of the study is to show that, despite profound doctrinal differences, Bulgakov and Florovsky maintained genuinely fraternal relations, thus illustrating the capacity of Orthodox theological dialogue to combine intellectual disagreement with personal communion.