In recent years, we've seen a dangerous trend in Orthodoxy: the misuse, abuse, and misinterpretation of economy. This God given tool for pastoral care has been twisted into a catch-all excuse for practices that undermine our faith and blur the boundaries of the Church.
It's time this is called this out for what it is: a betrayal of Orthodox tradition and a threat to our spiritual well-being.
What is Economy?
Economy, also referred to as Oikonomia, Economia, and Pastoral Discretion, is the Church's way of bending rules without breaking them - a spiritual emergency valve allowing flexibility when strict adherence might cause harm.
When can it be applied?
Contrary to contemporary understanding, economia has strict conditions for when it can be applied, as expressed by our Holy Fathers. This is potently summarized by Protopresbyter Anastasios K. Gotsopoulos in his book On Common Prayer with the Heterodox:
- Temporary: It's a short-term solution, not a permanent change.
- Purposeful: There must be a great spiritual need. It cannot be done simply out of preference, or because others will be scandalized.
- Doctrinally sound: It can never alter Orthodox teachings, dogma, or water down our faith.
- Acknowledged: Church leaders must recognize, and even communicate that this is an exception, and a condescension.
- Broadly accepted: The wider Orthodox community should agree it's appropriate.
St. Theodore the Studite emphasizes:
And what is more than this [acceptable application of economy], it will be, forgive me, no longer economy, but the guilt of lawlessness and the transgression of divine canons. For the limit of economy, as you know, is not to completely violate any regulation, and not to go to extremes, and not to cause harm to the most important thing in the case when a small indulgence can be made according to time and circumstances.
— St. Theodore the Studite, Epistle 24
St. Theophylact of Bulgaria further clarifies the proper application of economy:
He who does anything by economy, does not do so...because it is a good thing in and of itself, but because it is needful to do so in this particular circumstance.
— The Explanation of The Epistle of Saint Paul to the Galatians, pp. 69-70
St. Nicholas the Mystic, Patriarch of Constantinople, describes economy as:
An imitation of divine philanthropy [charity], which snatches out of the mouth of the beast howling against us him that is about to be swallowed by its destructive mouth.
— To the Most Holy in Every Respect Pope of Elder Rome, pp. 111, 213
Economy therefore, isn't a free pass. It's a carefully applied tool for pastoral care, not an excuse to ignore or change Church rules, as we often use it today.
Not infrequently [economia] lead to condemnable abuses, which no doubt cause much damage to the Church; this abuse often results in scandal and the consequent upheaval of Christian society.
— Professor Amilkas Alivizatos,Οἰκονομία, p. 57
Economia can never become the law
If the church, or a particular priest or a bishop invoke economy for an extended period of time, even for hundreds of years, that can never become the justification for it being the standard practice.
[...] the use of economia does not create a “customary” or “practical” canon law which would supplant exactitude.
— Protopresbyter Anastasios K. Gotsopoulos , On Common Prayer with the Heterodox
What was introduced by economia for some useful end must not be turned into an example and be henceforth held as a canon.
— Theodore Balsamon, in RP, Σύνταγμα, p. 214
Theodore Balsamon was a renowned canonist, and many of his interpretations are referenced explicitly in The Rudder.
We often may hear such following sentiments as justification for economia being law:
- "well, this has been done for the past 50-100 years"
- "this is what this church has done for the past 20 years"
- "the last 3 priests at this church did it this way"
- "this is the way it's done in this diocese"
- "this is the way we do it, because I'm being obedient to my bishop / priest, and obedience overrides the law of church"
These are all incorrect and irrelevant ways one attempts to discern standard practice in the Orthodox Church.
Economy by definition is a temporary relaxing and falling away from the rule. It cannot turn into standard practice, according to our saints.
For there is a limit to economy, and it is not perpetual and indefinite.
— St. Nikodemos, The Rudder
As for the “economy” which certain Fathers employed for a time it cannot be deemed either a law or an example [...]
— St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite, Agapios and Nicodemus, op. cit., Interpretation of the Canon of the Council of Carthage under St. Cyprian.
Economy must be exercised on an individual basis, only for a limited time, and it must be clearly acknowledged as a condescension from the normative stance. Often those who exercise such economy, expressing it as needful in a particular circumstance, refuse to state that this is a non-ideal condescension.
Obedience can never justify a false economy
Many clergyman exercise economy in such a way as to force people who reasonably and clearly can and want to fulfill the strictness (exactitude, akrivia) of the law. They do this for many reasons:
- They simply do not like the law, believing it to be too strict or disagreeable
- They don't think the law is applicable in our contemporary times
- They think to protect the sensibility of other souls, who believe will be scandalized seeing others striving for exactitude, as they judge these people to be weak
Examples of misuse include:
- Discouraging / preventing women from wearing head coverings
- Preventing catechumens from departing at the appropriate time
- Denying baptism to converts who have not been baptized correctly
These examples are by definition not economy, as there is NO need, but simply a desire to exert dominance and authority, but to present it as somehow loving.
True economy respects the conscience of the faithful. Forcing someone to adopt a more lenient practice against their will, when there is no need or justification is not economy or pastoral care - it's spiritual harm.
Moreover, economy should never be used as a tool for modernization or to accommodate secular values. When practices that have been part of Orthodox tradition for centuries are suddenly discarded or made optional under the guise of economy, we must be wary.
St. John Chrysostom does not mince words on this:
What then, you say, when he is wicked should we obey? Wicked? In what sense? If indeed in regard to Faith, flee and avoid him; not only if he be a man, but even if he be an angel come down from Heaven.
— St. John Chrysostom, Homily 34 on Hebrews, https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/240234.htm
Those desiring exactitude can under no circumstances be stigmatized
It is common today for those who desire exactitude, to be slandered, criticized, and denigrated. They are referred to as zealots, as "super correct", and as rigorists.
Many of this verbiage is taken from saints, who themselves, in our times undoubtedly would be viewed as zealots, "super correct", and rigorists.
Do you call me a one-sided, unenlightened rigorist? Leave me my one-sidedness and all my other deficiencies. I would rather be a deficient, unenlightened child of the Orthodox Church than an apparently perfect man who would dare to instruct the Church, who would allow himself to disobey the Church, to separate from it. My words will be pleasant to the true children of the Orthodox Church.
— St. Ignatius Brianchaninov, The Field
St. Cyril of Alexandria "praises strongly those who desire to live by exactitude." [Epistle 56, PG 77, 320]. All those who desire exactitude should be encouraged and praised.
[...] the one enacting economia is obliged to have understanding and render the necessary respect toward those desiring exactitude. It is inconceivable for those requesting exactitude to be stigmatized with extreme characterizations solely on those grounds, while conversely, according to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, “the Church as a genuine mother ‘praises strongly those who desire to live by exactitude,’”
— Protopresbyter Anastasios K. Gotsopoulos, On Common Prayer with the Heterodox
Dr. George S. Bebis highlights how even the Kollyvades fathers were slandered by desiring to preserve the akrivia of the traditional practice:
The problem is that those who adhere to the strictness of the Church's traditional practice of holding Memorial Services on Saturday are being slandered by those who choose to practice economy, even though the Ecumenical Patriarch clearly stated that those who adhere to the ancient tradition of the Church 'do well.'
— Confession of Faith (St. Nikodemos)
[...] if we do Memorial Services on Saturday, holding to the strictness and ancient tradition of the Church, you must not spy on us and criticize us for this, defaming us with slanderous names. Rather, you should praise us.
— St. Nikodemos, Confession of Faith
Our saints and elders tell us that adherence to the traditional practices of the Church (akrivia) should be encouraged and respected, not denigrated. They themselves, put this example forward:
[Elder Athimos] always had the sacred Rudder near him, and he sought its counsel. He even knew the footnotes for every topic.
— Dr. Charalambos M. Bousias, Elder Anthimos of Saint Annes
And yet, it is unfortunately very common today to see people being denigrated for striving for exactitude, even if it's just for themselves.
It is those who choose to practice economy who should exercise humility and restraint, recognizing that their approach is a concession, and not the ideal. The normative practice - following the traditions handed down by the Fathers - should be upheld as the standard.
When those practicing economy begin to criticize or slander those who maintain stricter adherence to tradition, they have fundamentally misunderstood the purpose and application of economy. Such behavior turns economy from a tool of pastoral care into a weapon of modernization and compromise.
We must remember that economy is meant to bring people closer to the fullness of Orthodox tradition, not to push them away from it. Those who maintain stricter practices are often the ones preserving the very traditions that give our faith its depth and richness.
Now of course, there are examples of rigorists, the super correct, and zealots. However, this isn't for us to determine through our opinion, but through the witness of the saints.
If we are clearly coming to conclusions that would have us judging our saints for being rigorists and zealots, we have gone awry somewhere, and must repent.
St. Nikodemos absolutely fought for and advocated for akrivia, for a topic MANY of these same contemporary Orthodox Christians would deem a "small and unimportant matter".
Lastly, disagreeing with those who adhere to false economia, isn't asserting one has the authority of a priest or a bishop. This is another popular misnomer. You absolutely have the right to speak and disagree, especially in matters of Orthodox, even with a priest or a bishop:
Every person has the right to speak and register his mind; no one should refrain from speaking out of fear in order to flatter a superior or because he wants to be on good terms with the archbishop or the abbot.
— St. Paisios the Athonite, With Pain and Love, pg. 365
The Abuse of Economy
Here are some examples of common misapplications of oikonomia, especially in our time:
- COVID: Don't go to church, don't venerate icons (Iconoclasm), don't partake of Holy Communion, get vaccines, use different spoons, etc
- Indiscriminate reception of heterodox converts without proper catechesis or baptism
- Allowing non-Orthodox clergy to participate in Orthodox services
- Permitting Orthodox faithful to participate in heterodox services
- Blessing mixed marriages, and even encouraging courtship of heretics
- Relaxing fasting rules on a broad scale, without genuine need or spiritual benefit
- Downplaying or ignoring canonical impediments to ordination
- Approving utilization of contraception
- Tolerating New Age or occult practices among the faithful
- Accepting immodest dress, especially amongst those established in the faith
- Giving Antidoron to those who are not Orthodox
- Allowing the use of musical instruments in liturgical services
- Baptizing children of parents lapsed in the faith (homosexuals, non practicing Orthodox, etc)
- Allowing inquirers and catechumens to stay during the liturgy of the faithful
- Allowing monophysites to commune
- Permitting people to venerate icons with face masks on (yes, this still happens)
- Allowing people to partake of Holy Communion after arriving after the Gospel reading, and allowing them to depart before the post Communion prayers
And much more.
The followers of unenlightened custom... are easily led into error, accepting customs which the Church has allowed only out of her condescension or economy as if they were the best of Orthodoxy, and also improper customs of recent heterodox origin and inspiration.
— Fr. Seraphim Rose, Blessed Paisius Velichcovsky, Introduction
Their usual argument for these things? A false notion that their love overcomes and supersedes fidelity to Christ and his commandments.
Holy Disobedience: When Obedience Becomes Sin
Given the widespread abuse of economy, what are we to do?
There are times when disobedience to spiritual authorities becomes not only permissible but necessary. The Holy Fathers provide guidance on the situations in which it is profitable to practice holy disobedience:
- When a spiritual authority teaches heresy or promotes practices contrary to Orthodox Tradition
- When silence on matters of faith endangers souls
- When commanded to participate in ecumenist activities that compromise Orthodox teaching
- When faced with innovations in worship or doctrine that contradict Holy Tradition
- When a spiritual father shows indifference to or acceptance of heretical teachings
St. John Chrysostom urges us:
If he is such in the faith, avoid him and leave him; not only if he happens to be a man but even if he happens to be an angel descending from heaven.
— Saint John Chrysostom, Homily on the Epistle to Hebrews 34, 1. PG 63, 231
study the divine Scriptures by yourself and particularly the practical writings of the Holy Fathers; so that by cross-examining the teachings and works of your teacher and Leader with these [writings] you may become able to see and to comprehend [his teachings]. And those teachings that are in agreement with the Scriptures, you should adopt and hold them dear in your mind, while the adulterated and foreign ones you should learn to perceive them as such and to turn them away, in order not to be deceived. For know this: many deceivers and false teachers have come forth in these days
— St. Symeon the New Theologian, Practical and Theological Chapters 32, by P. Christou in ΕΠΕ (Library of Greek Fathers) Philokalia of the Neptic and Ascetic Fathers 3, Patristic Editions Gregory Palamas, Thessalonica, p.242
St. Ignatius Brianchaninov warns us plainly:
Perhaps you retort: A novice's faith can take the place of an incompetent elder. It is untrue. Faith in the truth saves. Faith in a lie and in diabolic delusion is ruinous, according to the teaching of the Apostle. They refused to love the truth that would save them, he says of those who are voluntarily perishing. Therefore, God will send them (will permit them to suffer) a strong delusion, so that they will believe a lie, that all may be condemned who do not believe the truth but delight in falsehood. (2 Thess. 2: 10-12)
— The Arena
St. Ephraim of Syria cautions:
Woe unto those who pollute the holy Faith with heresies or who subject themselves to heretics.
— Saint Ephraim of Syria, Homily on the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in Devout Ephraim of Syria – Works, tome IV, edition "The Garden of Panaghia", Thessalonica 1992, p.26
Remember, true obedience is to Christ and His Church, not to just any individual who may lead us astray.
Dogma isn't relegated only to the canons
Fr. Seraphim Rose explains this well.
Just the other day I read an astute comment on the iconoclastic crisis of the 7th-8th centuries. Before the Seventh Ecumenical Council the Orthodox Church did not have any explicit “doctrine on icons,” and so one could argue that the Iconoclasts were not heretics at all, and the dispute was one over the secondary issue of “rite” or “practice.” Nonetheless, the Church (in the person of Her champions, the leading icon- venerators) felt She was fighting a heresy, something destructive to the Church Herself; and after Her champions had suffered and died for this Orthodox sensitivity, and Her theologians had finally managed to put down explicitly the doctrine She already knew in Her heart — then the cause of Orthodoxy triumphed at the Seventh Ecumenical Council, and the Iconoclasts were clearly singled out as heretics.
I suspect that the very same thing, only much vaster and more complicated, is happening today: that those who feel Orthodoxy (through living its life of grace and being exposed to and raised on its basic treasures — lives of saints, Patristic writings, etc.) are battling together against an enemy, a heresy, that has not yet been fully defined or manifested. Separate aspects or manifestations of it (chiliasm, social Gospel, renovationism, ecumenism) may be identified and fought, but the battle is largely instinctive as yet, and those who do not feel Orthodoxy in their heart and bones (e.g., those who are brought up on “Concern” and “Young Life”* instead of lives of saints!) do not really know what you’re talking about and they can’t understand how you can become so excited over something which no council has ever identified as a heresy.
— Fr. Seraphim Rose, Not of This World
Usually, those who argue for oikonomia, will argue that, in matters where no canon exists, that clergy need not even invoke oikonomia. They simply can establish what they believe is right, and laity must obey.
Anyone who implies such implies that, before the 7th ecumenical council, clergy could say that iconoclasm was correct, and we would have to obey. This implication denigrates our holy saints who died before the 7th ecumenical council clearly established what these saints always knew.
Our canons are an extension of the consensus of our deified and glorified fathers and saints.
These saints who knew in their heart, without needing to read a canon, that iconography was correct, and correctly disobeyed anyone that said otherwise.
Therefore, we must understand that although our canons are an aspect of dogma, they do not, and cannot, encompass all matters of dogma. And so we should not think, just because something is not outlined in the canons, that we simply have to obey whatever we are told.
Is this judgmental? Is this condemnation?
There are those who would say that merely pointing out these abuses and offenses is judgmental and condemnation. We offer the following in response:
Christ did also say “Do not judge, or you too will be judged” (Matthew 7:1), which some hierarchs like to repeat often. But [when these clergymen say this] they mean not to interfere at all because the hierarchs, and even the priests, are beyond criticism, and they can do whatever they want and say whatever they want. Who said that? [No Holy Father teaches this. - Editor] All of them are subject to the Gospel and to the Holy Canons. And that which they say and advise to people must be in line with that which the Holy Canons say.
— Archimandrite Savvas Agiorites
When asked whether Orthodox Christians have sinned if they are obedient to bishops and priests who are telling them to do the wrong thing:
Of course these Orthodox Christians are guilty of sin, because we have to choose the right Spiritual Father…. we are rational sheep. [i.e. Christ’s sheep that can think for themselves.] Therefore, we have to judge the actions of the Spiritual Fathers. Not to judge them, personally, but judge them in order to discern the correct spiritual father from the incorrect spiritual father - the fraud, as the blessed Father Athanasius Mitilinaios would say. How would you discern the wolf, the fake shepherd, from the true Shepherd? You would have to have some sort of criteria. You would have to judge, and Christ Himself told us, “judge with righteous judgement” (John 7:24).
— Archimandrite Savvas Agiorites
In the realm of teaching, dogma, actions, oftentimes, conscientious Christians will want to warn, or tell others: "Be aware that his position on this is this, and this is problematic." So that you don't get led away. And I think that is legitimate. We do not judge people. We do not judge their salvation. We don't judge their inner workings. We don't hypothesize on what their motivations were. We don't imagine their inner thoughts. We don't say they're all lost. What we can and should do, is say, "This is the Orthodox faith. This teaching is not correct. Unfortunately, this bishop or this priest teaches that. Let's pray that he repents of it. But that's not what the Holy Fathers teach us," if we know and understand the teaching of the Holy Fathers. That is legitimate.
— Archpriest Peter Heers, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TmqHvacbW4
Economy based on "Scandal"
Some argue that following the exactitude of the law may scandalize those who are not strong enough And this scandal may lead people away from the church.
What do our saints say about this?
The following quotes from this section are all from "Concerning Frequent Communion" by St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite, specifically, from Objection 9, but it applies just as much to any dogmatic matter
First let us understand what the word scandal means properly:
Scandal is that which distances a man from God and brings him near to the devil, according to Basil the Great: "Committing sin alienates us from the Lord and associates us with the devil." And again he says: "Everything opposed to the will of the Lord is a scandal."
— St. Nikodemos
When we cause a scandal, is when we do that which is opposed to the will of the lord. To take the scandal of human, and to place it above God, is not God pleasing.
When that which is pleasing to God is hindered by another's being scandalized, we should be concerned about this: that we not be forced because of him to offend God.
— St. John Chrysostom
Let us also understand that those who are scandalized by their brethren following the popular dogma of the church, suffer from envy and hatred.
But if some say that they are unable to see others communing frequently without being scandalized, let them understand for themselves that this is the result of either envy or hatred of their brother.
— St. Basil the Great
The saints are very clear that what is pleasing to God, even if it causes scandal to our brethren, should still be done.
Tell me, if, while we are discoursing and putting drunkards to shame, someone is scandalized, should I stop speaking?
— St. John Chrysostom
If people choose to criticize and deride us, we are told to laugh and weep at their foolishness, and to be unconcerned with what they say.
But if, though we give no such opportunity to them, they choose to criticize us thoughtlessly and without discrimination, let us laugh and weep because of their foolishness. Try to do “good things in the sight of the Lord and in the sight of men” (2 Cor. 8:21). If, though you do good things, he still derides, have no more concern over it....
— St. John Chrysostom
The following sums up the matter definitively:
Therefore, those who do what is outside of the commandment of God are the ones who cause scandals and disorder, and not those who struggle as much as they can to keep the Master's commandments.
— St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite
Scandal in the church is ALWAYS created by those who do not fulfill the commandment of God. And we of course should understand that commandments here is referring to all of the dogma of the church.
Reclaiming True Economy
So, what are we to do in the face of a false economia?
- You should already be laboring to pray ceaselessly, and attain to the purification & illumination of your nous. Purify yourself to acquire discernment, that you may think, speak, and correct with discernment. It is impossible to do so otherwise.
- Study the Fathers and the canons. Know what the Church actually teaches about economy, that you may protect yourself, and even reprove those in positions of authority.
The people of God must become knowledgeable about the dogmatic teachings of the Church. The laity must know the doctrine of our Faith well, and the basis of our Orthodox spirituality, so that if at some point priests, bishops or patriarchs manuever in a heretical manner, the people of God can and must reprove them... Then, if the people of God continue to educate themselves doctrinally they will surely be able to protect themselves.
— Elder Athanasios Mitilinaios, 'Revelation: The Triumph of the Lamb. Lesson 81
- Start to question practices that seem to contradict Orthodox tradition, and encourage others to do so as well. Don't be afraid to register your mind, even to a priest or a bishop. According to the saints (who are the ultimate authority in the church), you have every right to speak.
Every person has the right to speak and register his mind; no one should refrain from speaking out of fear in order to flatter a superior or because he wants to be on good terms with the archbishop or the abbot.
— St. Paisios the Athonite, With Pain and Love, pg. 365
- Resist pressure to participate in activities that compromise Orthodox teachings. No one can force you to dress immodestly. No one can force you to be received through Chrismation. No one can force you to not depart from the services at the appropriate time. If you are persecuted for this, then you will be in the company of the saints, who were all persecuted as well.
- Support clergy and hierarchs who uphold traditional Orthodox practice.
- Be prepared to practice holy disobedience when faced with clear violations of Orthodox faith and practice.
St. Basil the Great states:
The economias done in regard to the churches are done by those entrusted with the protection thereof, but are affirmed by the people.
— PG 32, 860
Protopresbyter George D. Metallinos powerfully reminds us:
Especially in our day when everything is considered relative, even in the ecclesiastical domain, persistence in the tradition of the Saints is the most substantial counteraction against the general decline, even if such a position is ridiculed as lacking love. True love is the love for the truth in Christ.
— I Confess One Baptism
Our commitment to the fullness of Orthodox truth is not an act of rigidity, but rather an expression of genuine love - love for Christ, His Church, and for the souls of all people.
The Fathers of the Church who appeared 'harsh' in the observation of dogma are those who loved their fellow man more than anything. Since they recognized His unfathomable depths, they did not want to mock him through niceties and empty love, but they honored Him by the Gospel of Truth, which grants the blessed life in the Holy Spirit. Rigid adherence to dogma is therefore not narrow-mindedness, nor is the struggle for Orthodoxy bigotry, but rather this is the sole means of authentic love.
— Letter of the Holy Monastery of Stavronikita on Mount Athos, signed by Fr. Vasileios (Gontikakis, the abbot at that time) and by Saint Paisios
Conclusion
Economia has become the tool of modernists and ecumenists. It is being applied out of simple preference or even fear of a scandal. Econmia has become the tool by which supposedly unloving dogma is done away with, of course without ever acknowledging this as a specific exception, and condescension, as is required. And lastly, we are allowing temporary condescension to become a perpetual, standard rule.
One rightly can practice oikonomia whenever pious doctrine remains unharmed.
— St. Eulogius, Patriarch of Alexandria, Eulogius, quoted by Photius in Library, 227; ed. R. Henry (Paris: Belles Lettres, 1965), 4:112
Economy is not the arm for spiritual fathers and clergymen to do whatever it is they please, for the laity to then blindly obey.
The church isn't the ship of each bishop to do with as he pleases
— St. Paisios the Athonite, St. Paisios of Mount Athos
Exercising obedience is a virtue, but it is also the way many have fallen into heresy.
We must understand that obedience exacted by our saints to illumined and glorified elders who adhered strictly to dogma, cannot be applied to those in the organization who have not attained illumination, and are clearly departing from the teachings of the church and Holy fathers.
We further cannot justify a demonic silence or indifference on this subject, nor can we categorize speaking as judgment or condemnation of clergy and those who exercise this economia, simply because we disagree.
Every person has the right to speak and register his mind; no one should refrain from speaking out of fear in order to flatter a superior or because he wants to be on good terms with the archbishop or the abbot.
— St. Paisios the Athonite, With Pain and Love, pg. 365
We must at the very least, speak. To witness to our faith, and to not be silence, as those in the church organization seek to stigmatize all those who desire exactitude to the dogma of the church.
Our saints, who in unison always desired akrivia (strictness, exactitude), were frequently persecuted by the church organization. But yet, they chose to please God, rather than to please man, and they were glorified for it.
St. Athanasius the Great, St. John Chrysostom (who was clearly persecuted by the Orthodox church-organization), St. Maximus the Confessor, St. Gregory Palamas, St. Nikodemos.
Who will we choose to serve? God, or man?
Our saints (the church organism) exercised holy disobedience in matters that would be considered insignificant today by many. They were persecuted, stigmatized, slandered, and hated.
May we have the courage to follow in their footsteps, that we may please not man, but God.
Through the prayers of all our saints, especially the most pious St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite, O Lord Jesus Christ our God, have mercy on us and save us.
Amen.
The text ends here, but additional quotes are provided after this.
"Economy or Oikonomia means “the management of the house.” It is an exercise of stewardship by the Church in allowing deviations from the exactitude of the standard (akriveia) when necessary for particular circumstances and for the salvation of the many. Oikonomia cannot become akriveia but is temporary, circumstantial, and driven by necessity..."
— On the Reception of Heterodox into the Orthodox Church
The application of economy has presuppositions that are required by the canons. As economy means a deviation from the rule based on the needs of the times, economy can never replace the rule, oikonomia cannot become akriveia. When the presuppositions for the application of economy are lacking, economy cannot be applied. When the presuppositions are in place for the canonical application of economy, economy can be applied if necessary but is not mandatory, as “All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful; all things are lawful for me, but not all things edify." (1 Cor. 10:23)
— On The Reception of Heterodox into the Orthodox Church
Without the aforementioned principles, and the interpretive key of oikonomia (economy) and akriveia (exactitude), it becomes impossible to reconcile apparent contradictions in the canons, councils, and writings of the saints. Without these principles, one often is left to pick and choose what teachings from the canons, councils, and saints agree with their own thinking, rather than being led to the truth.
— On The Reception of Heterodox into the Orthodox Church
...he who ventures forth into ‘ecclesiastical economia’ does so maintaining undiminished respect for the existing ecclesiastical order...This explains the efforts of those truly acting within economia to emphasize that the measures undertaken by them do not harm the authority of the holy canons and the patristic ordinances.
— Kotsonis, Οἰκονομία, p. 105.
“Well,” the false apostles argue, “did you not circumcise Timothy?” “Yes, I did,” Paul replies, “but only by economy. It is one thing to circumcise once, on a particular occasion and for a certain reason, and quite another to preach circumcision for everyone”... [St. Theophylact explains:] But one who circumcises a man by economy, does so not because circumcision is a good thing in and of itself, but because it is useful to do so in this particular circumstance.
— Theophylact of Ohrid, The Explanation of the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Galatians, pp. 69-70.