The ancient canons are regarded as a collection of texts with almost the same status as the biblical text in the Easter Orthodox Church. The corpus has therefore a firm position in the identity of this church-tradition and is recognized as how faith, expressed in the gospels should be lived in ecclesial practice. How the ancient canons should be applied or used in contemporary ecclesial practice has been challenged in modernity. This thesis addresses how some scholars have faced this challenge answering how the canons could be relevant to contemporary ecclesial practice. More precise, it evaluates some answers to the question of relevance after (what we could regard as the first answer in modernity) the Scholastic school. The Scholastic school is approaching the canons more or less as formalist law. This has stirred justified reactions by a stream of scholars in the field. In the present study three such reactions is considered in the works of John H Erickson, Andrey Shishkov and David Wagschal. The basic argument of the thesis is, to better answer question of relevance, a new paradigm needs to be introduced, distinguishing between social identity and discursive practice. This means to accept “a space of uncertainty” letting go of the ambition to apply the ancient canons and instead give space to contemporary life situations to be informed by them. The tension between the past and the present is managed by an understanding of canon law as a substantive justice system in which the ancient canons belongs a realm of identity, and canon law as an outcome of discursive practice. In the end we could suggest that “the space of uncertainty” needs to be managed by an institution.