Fate of Orthodox Christianity's Great and Holy Council Hangs in the Balance
January 21, 2016
By Rev. Nicolas Kazarian
During the meeting of Christian Orthodox
Primates (heads of local Orthodox churches),
which begins today in Switzerland, the
participants will show the world whether the
unity of the Orthodox Church is more important
than their particular agendas.
The issue facing the Primates is whether to
convene, as planned, a “Holy and Great” Council
of the Orthodox Church, or Pan-Orthodox Council
as it is also called, around the feast of
Pentecost, in June of this year.
The Holy and Great Council (if it takes place)
will have
historical momentum, not only
for Orthodox believers, but also for the global
religious landscape.
Given increasing religious pluralism on the
international scene, the fall of the Soviet
Union, and growing secularization in developed
countries, the convocation of a Pan-Orthodox
Council is, in part, intended to signal the
continued unity of communion among the fourteen
independent, or autocephalous,
Orthodox Churches.
The idea of convening a “Holy and Great
Council,” whose name ties it to the First
Ecumenical Council of Nicaea (325), has been
under discussion since the early 20thcentury.
The Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras (1886-1972)
officially initiated the pre-conciliar process
in 1961 by organizing the first Panorthodox
Conference in Rhodes. Five Panorthodox
Preconciliar Conferences have been held to date
(1976, 1982, 1986, 2009 and 2015).
One of the role of the Preconciliar Conferences
has been to prepare documents on ten topics to
be studied by the Council:
- The Orthodox Diaspora.
- The way in which autocephaly is granted.
- The way in which autonomy is granted to semi-independent churches within autocephalous churches, like the orthodox church of Finland that belongs to the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
- The diptychs. They are the list of autocephalous churches according to their honor and rank. Can the order of the churches be changed?
- The Church calendar. Some orthodox churches still use the old Julian calendar (the Russian Orthodox Church for instance), others has adopted the new Gregorian calendar (like the Church of Greece). The Council will have to promote a common practice.
- Canonical impediments to marriage, especially in the case of inter-Christian marriages.
- Fasting. Should the rules of fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays be changed?
- Relationships with the non-Orthodox denominations, such as the Roman Catholic Church, and the Anglican Communion.
- The ecumenical movement.
- The contribution of Orthodoxy to affirming peace, fraternity, and freedom.
Besides studying these topics, the Great and Holy Council will be tasked with formulating responses to at least three challenges:
1. Tackle Nationalism
The decline of the Ottoman Empire in the late
19th century led to a reassessment of
religious identities in regions previously under
its control. Orthodoxy, a traditional marker of
ethnic identity in many Balkan countries became
an integral part of these countries’ nationalist
and separatist claims.
Nationalist and separatist movements alike
turned to Orthodoxy and its religious symbols to
generate support for their political goals.
Alongside the nation-building process, a similar
“separatist” phenomenon occurred in religious
terms, which could be described as
church-building. This “separatist” phenomenon
resulted in the creation of autocephalous
Orthodox Churches in Greece (1833), Serbia
(1832), Exarchate of Bulgaria (1870), Romania
(1885), among others.
The fusion between ethnic and religious
identities created a pattern
of ethnicity-basedchurches at odds
with the pattern of
the region-based communion of
local churches.
Not content with establishing parallel parishes
or even dioceses in regions administered by
local Orthodox churches or in the Diaspora,
these churches emphasized ethno-centric
allegiances as more important than the spiritual
unity of the Orthodox communion, although the
pastoral care they provided to members with
similar ethnic backgrounds cannot be totally set
aside.
The Constantinople Synod officially condemned
this tendency of racial hatred and
discrimination (also
called ethnophyletism) in 1872.
Despite this condemnation, the establishment of
Orthodoxy as an essential symbol of ethnic
identity spread throughout southeastern Europe.
One of the main challenges for the Holy and
Great Council will be to address this
phenomenon, which undermines the unity of the
Orthodox Churches and contributes to its
fragmentation.
2. Address Geopolitical
Tensions
Orthodox Christianity is a geopolitical reality.
Territory is an essential element of its
canonical operation. The autocephalous Orthodox
churches are territorial units modeled on
historic administrative networks. Territory is
not only canonical space; it has gradually been
integrated into religious, ethnic and national
identities. Orthodox churches continue to
support the interests of their countries of
origin, serving as relays of influence.
Orthodoxy is often considered a part of a
national government’s “soft power,” especially
at the international level.
Many of the issues raised during the
pre-conciliar process have geopolitical
repercussions, which have compelled the Primates
to address openly issues of territorial
authority and church jurisdiction.
With respect to geopolitical tensions, the main
issue remains that of diaspora Orthodoxy. Due to
migratory patterns throughout the
20th century, Orthodoxy’s center of gravity
shifted out of the traditionally Orthodox world
and into non-Orthodox countries, especially in
the West.
This reality, along with today's new
geopolitical realities, weighs heavily on the
pre-conciliar process. It generates tensions, or
even oppositions, between the Russian Orthodox
Church and the first among equals, the Primus inter Pares of the Orthodox churches — the Ecumenical
Patriarchate of Constantinople.
3. Confront Fundamentalism
Orthodox fundamentalism has been another
challenge of particular concern. As George
Demacopoulos of Fordham University writes: “Like
other fundamentalist movements, Orthodox
fundamentalism reduces all theological teaching
to a subset of theological axioms and then
measures the worthiness of others according to
them.”
The issue is this: how much influence will the
most radically conservative fringe have on the
Holy and Great Council's decisions on such
issues as canonical impediments to marriage,
relationships with heterodox churches, and the
ecumenical movement? These decisions will be the
result of intense negotiations. In the recent
past, the most conservative voices have proven
to be quite influential, especially on issues
like ecumenism.
Due to the fact that all of the Council's
decisions must be made unanimously, the
fundamentalist minority could use its veto power
to put pressure on the process and to influence
the final wording. Often used as a political
tool, Orthodox fundamentalism provokes the
creation of new alliances, thus making the
difficult goal of continued Orthodox unity more
complex.
At best, fundamentalists will contribute to the
Council's message of unity, while at worst they
could cause the proceedings to devolve into a
clash of civilizations, a schism, and open
theological discord of the kind witnessed during
the Second Vatican Council.
Convening the Holy and Great Council in June
despite these various tensions would send a
powerful message of unity. Whether it will be
held or not will be decided by the Primates who
meet today. Three hundred million Orthodox
across the world and countless friends await
their decision.