Orthodox voices are heard but not always understood

The Great Schism of 1054 marked the break between western and eastern Christianity. The latter call themselves “Orthodox”, meaning “having preserved the right way of glorifying God”. The reasons for the separation were theological, but even more political, notably in reaction to the growing temporal power of the pope [in Rome].

The eastern churches have been profoundly scarred by recent history. Many Orthodox now live in the diaspora in the West, while others had to endure the Communist era with its succession of humiliations. Because of the different paths they have taken, a Parisian Orthodox Christian does not necessarily have the same reference points as one in Moscow! Furthermore, the situation of churches in eastern Europe differs from one country to the next. In some countries, they have close ties to the state, in others not at all. The Orthodox world is far from being as uniform as it might appear.

The Orthodox churches have been actively involved in the ecumenical movement since its inception. They have also improved their relations with the Roman Catholic Church. They have, however, often felt misunderstood, to the extent of feeling pushed to one side and systematically reduced to a minority position.

This lack of understanding has created tensions, to the point where certain Orthodox churches have contemplated withdrawing from the World Council of Churches (WCC). To try and remedy the situation, a Special Commission was created which, after thorough study, published a set of recommendations intended to better ensure respect for various sensitivities. These recommendations focus particularly on methods of decision-making, ways of worshipping together, and on the different ways in which a church might relate to the WCC.

The meeting of the WCC Faith and Order Plenary Commission in Kuala Lumpur from 28 July to 6 August was a good opportunity to take stock of the situation.

Voices making themselves heard

To the question, “Are the voices of the Orthodox being heard today, especially here in Faith and Order?”, all those whom we interviewed replied in the affirmative, and agreed that there has been a striking development in terms of the number of interventions. They believe this is mainly due to the work of the Special Commission, which has given confidence to the Orthodox churches, and particularly to the fact that they are no longer liable to be bound, against their will, by decisions taken in WCC bodies in which they constitute a minority. The model for decision-making which will probably be applied at the WCC Assembly in Porto Alegre in 2006 is in fact based on seeking a consensus, rather than a majority vote in which there are always losers.

“For the first time in my experience, the Orthodox voices are very constructive, and are being largely taken into consideration, notably in the discussions on baptism or on ecclesiology,” we were told by Metropolitan Gennadios of Sassima, of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, who is vice-moderator of the Commission on Faith and Order. “At a preparatory meeting, I asked the Orthodox to take a more active part in the discussions, and they did so,” he added.

Father Heikki Huttunen, an Orthodox parish priest from Finland, is more reserved: “That we listen to one another is certain, but I am not sure that we understand one another.” He added that “this raises a question of method” in Faith and Order work, pointing out that the Orthodox interventions are often made from a defensive position, rather than as initiatives in a creative spirit. “We should leave behind a rather legalistic approach to theological study” and “build bridges between canonical language and people’s spiritual reality.”

Problems with ethics and lifestyles

Several interventions in plenary sessions by Orthodox delegates put the accent strongly on questions they have about changing lifestyles, especially the growing acknowledgement of homosexuality in the West. Thus Metropolitan Bishoy of Damiette, representing the Coptic Orthodox Church, said during the discussion on “the nature and mission of the church” that: “According to the Scriptures, St Paul warned that homosexuality was a great sin. Consequently, the verse ‘Receive one another, as Christ has received you...’ (Romans 15:7; the theme of the conference) does not apply to homosexuals who do not repent.”

This view was far from being shared by all the Orthodox present. For some, before making a definitive statement, one must begin by admitting that homosexuality is a reality which exists in everyday life. Others said they were surprised that this question emerged at this moment in the discussion, rather than during the debate on “human nature” (theological anthropology).

Father Huttunen fervently hoped that this topic would not become a “status confessionis”, a position taken on principle on which no discussion is possible. In his opinion, what is at stake is not to maintain “the purity of the church”, but to take the Bible seriously, which raises the whole question of its interpretation for today.

“This can only be done by continually going back to the Bible to read it anew, as the church fathers did,” we were told by Anastasia Vassiliadou, a young Greek Orthodox theologian. “They interpreted the Bible for their time, and we should do the same. We could freeze the church fathers, make a ‘new Bible’ of them, but we could also read the spirit of the fathers.” She concluded by saying, “We must not forget the purpose of the church: to save the people and the world. This is the essential. The church is there for the salvation of the world, not for its own salvation!”

Worshipping together

The Orthodox liturgical tradition is rich in symbols which may seem strange to western Christians. Conversely the worship practices of certain other churches, notably those of the Reformation heritage, are so far from those to which the East is accustomed that an Orthodox may have a hard time feeling comfortable with them. Among the Special Commission’s recommendations, one concerns common worship, and recommends especially that more space be given at ecumenical gatherings to worship services according to specific confessional traditions, to which members of other traditions are invited. This is seen as an occasion to immerse oneself in other traditions, to discover them from the inside.

The Orthodox participants at this Faith and Order meeting greatly regretted the lack of such worship services during this meeting, although they appreciated the effort made to prepare interconfessional prayers by bringing together elements drawn from different traditions.

Dialogue with other religions needed

A majority of Orthodox churches live in multi-religious contexts. Quite a few are minorities in countries with non-Christian majorities, for example the Copts in Egypt and others in the Middle East. This makes them particularly sensitive to the need to develop dialogue with other religions. For Anastasia Vassiliadou, “Interreligious dialogue is not intended simply to maintain good relations with the other religions; it has a direct impact on our faith.” Consequently, she thinks that the interreligious issue should be integrated into the various Faith and Order studies. The definition of the church’s missionary activity should also be reconsidered.

Demand for exactness

What is the Orthodox churches’ particular contribution to the ecumenical movement?

For Metropolitan Gennadios, the Orthodox have contributed for many years to providing food for Faith and Order’s theological reflection. In particular, they have brought to it all their reflections on the role of the Holy Spirit.

“The Orthodox bring a rigour, they demand that ideas be precise, that matters be followed through all the way,” added Father Huttunen.

The Russian Orthodox Church contributes in this spirit. Bishop Hilarion of Vienna and Austria, one of its representatives, insisted on the fact that “the tragedy of the divisions among Christians must be taken more seriously”. He also spoke of new divisions, not between churches but within them, between traditional and liberal trends.

The conclusions of the Special Commission, initiated at the request of the Orthodox, are counted among Orthodoxy’s contributions to the ecumenical movement. They propose real changes which will enable the WCC to be even more ecumenical.

Finally, Anastasia Vassiliadou concluded, “They bring the riches of their tradition. Like the others, they must participate fully in the ecumenical movement. They bring something and receive something. They challenge the ecumenical movement not to take the easy way, but to deal with matters honestly and seriously.”



By Olivier Schopfer


(Olivier Schopfer is a Swiss Reformed minister. He works as the web-editor of the World Council of Churches in the public information team.)





Opinions expressed in this ChristianToday Feature do not necessarily reflect ChristianToday policy.