Revistă fondată în anul 1929 de către Prof. dr. Teodor M. Popescu Seria a III-a, Anul IV, Nr. 3, iulie-septembrie, 2008
COLEGIUL DE REDACŢIE: Preşedinte: Preafericitul Părinte DANIEL, Patriarhul Bisericii Ortodoxe Române Membri de onoare: Acad. pr. prof. dr. Mircea PĂCURARIU (SIBIU); Acad. pr. prof. dr. Dumitru POPESCU (BUCUREŞTI); Acad. prof. dr. Emilian POPESCU (IAŞI); PS dr. Hilarion ALFEYEV (VIENA); Pr. prof. dr. John BEHR (CRESTWOOD NY); Pr. prof. dr. John MCGUCKIN (NEW YORK); Pr. prof. dr. Eugen J. PENTIUC (BROOKLINE MA); Prof. dr. Tudor TEOTEOI (BUCUREŞTI). Membri: Pr. prof. dr. Ştefan BUCHIU, decanul Facultăţii de Teologie Ortodoxă Justinian Patriarhul din Bucureşti; Pr. prof. dr. Viorel SAVA, decanul Facultăţii de Teologie Ortodoxă Dumitru Stăniloae din Iaşi; IPS prof. dr. Laurenţiu STREZA, decanul Facultăţii de Teologie Ortodoxă Andrei Şaguna din Sibiu; IPS prof. dr. Irineu POPA, decanul Facultăţii de Teologie Ortodoxă din Craiova; Pr. prof. dr. Ioan CHIRILĂ, decanul Facultăţii de Teologie Ortodoxă din Cluj-Napoca; Pr. prof. dr. Ioan TULCAN, decanul Facultăţii de Teologie Ortodoxă din Arad. Redactori corespondenţi: Lect. dr. Ionuţ-Alexandru TUDORIE, Bucureşti; Pr. conf. dr. Ion VICOVAN, Iaşi; Conf. dr. Paul BRUSANOWSKI, Sibiu; Conf. dr. Mihai-Valentin VLADIMIRESCU, Craiova; Pr. conf. dr. Ştefan FLOREA, Târgovişte; Pr. lect. dr. Viorel POPA, Oradea; Pr. lect. dr. Teofil STAN, Baia-Mare; Pr. asist. drd. Cristian ŞONEA, Cluj-Napoca; Drd. Georgică GRIGORIŢĂ, Roma; Pr. drd. Sorin ZAHIU, Atena; Dr. Mihai GRIGORE, Erfurt; Drd. Emanuel DOBRE, Strasbourg. Redactor şef: Prof. dr. Remus RUS; Redactori: Lect. dr. Adrian MARINESCU, Asist. dr. Alexandru MIHĂILĂ, Asist. drd. Sebastian NAZÂRU; Secretar de redacţie: Lect. dr. Ionuţ-Alexandru TUDORIE Corectură: Asist. dr. Constantin GEORGESCU (filolog); Traducere în lb. engleză: Asist. Maria BĂNCILĂ (filolog); Tehnoredactare: Asist. dr. Alexandru MIHĂILĂ; Administrator redacţie: Ion-Dragoş VLĂDESCU Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune Ortodoxă Director: Dr. Aurelian MARINESCU Tipografia Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune Ortodoxă Consilier patriarhal: Pr. Valer ULICAN Coperta şi viziunea grafică a revistei: Doina DUMITRESCU Redacţia: Str. Sf. Ecaterina, Nr. 2-4, cod 040155, Bucureşti, sect. 4, România; OP 53, CP 125; Tel. (+40) 722 620 172; (+40) 21 335 61 17; Fax: (+40) 21 335 07 75; e-mail: studiiteologice@yahoo.com www.studiiteologice.editurapatriarhiei.ro Materialele trimise la redacţie nu se înapoiază. Redacţia îşi rezervă dreptul de a opera modificări atât asupra formei, cât şi a conţinutului materialelor trimise spre publicare şi roagă să fie respectate recomandările postate electronic la următoarea adresă web: www.studiiteologice.editurapatriarhiei.ro/conditii.php PREŢURI STRĂINĂTATE Uniunea Europeană: 1 abonament (4 exemplare) = 28 ; 1 exemplar = 7 Alte ţări: 1 abonament (4 exemplare) = 48 ; 1 exemplar = 12
CURPINS Prolog... 5 Studii Viorel IONIŢĂ The Vision of Unity in the multilateral dialogues and in the bilateral dialogues of the Orthodox Churches with other churches... 7 Daniel MIHOC The Two Witnesses of Rev 11 and the Mission of the Church... 59 Sorin ŞELARU Le rapport entre l Église comme sacrement et les sacrements particuliers chez le père Staniloaë... 77 Marius PORTARU Contribuţia pr. Dumitru Stăniloae (1903-1993) în domeniul traducerilor patristice româneşti. Problema cronologiei traducerilor, principiile traductologice şi receptarea critică... 103 Din SfinÆii PärinÆi ai Bisericii Sf. ROMAN MELODUL Luna lui iulie în douăzeci de zile. Condac la pomenirea Sfântului Prooroc Ilie... 143 Din Teologia Ortodoxä contemporanä Robert M. HADDAD Pe urmele lui Filioque... 167 3
CUPRINS Dialog teologic Dragoş MÎRŞANU Notă asupra traducerii patristice în cultura română de azi. Răspuns unei critici insuficient contextualizate... 223 Adrian MURARU Câteva consideraţii privitoare la traducerea textelor patristice în limba română răspuns domnului Sabin Preda... 231 Recenzii Problemele unei traduceri între Scila teologiei şi Caribda academiei. Epifanie al Salaminei, Ancoratus. Traducere şi note Oana Coman, studiu introductiv Dragos Mîrşanu. Iaşi, Polirom, 2007 (Andrei-Dragoş GIULEA)... 277 Reviste de Teologie Revue d Études Augustiniennes et Patristique (Adrian MARINESCU)... 283 4
THE VISION OF UNITY... StTeol 3/2008, pp. 7-58 TUDII Viorel IONIÜÅ Facultatea de Teologie Ortodoxă Bucureşti THE VISION OF UNITY IN THE MULTILATERAL DIALOGUES AND IN THE BILATERAL DIALOGUES OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCHES WITH OTHER CHURCHES 1 Keywords: unity, theological dialogue, ecumenism, Christian Churches, Ecumenical Movement The experience of the Orthodox Church 2 in relation to the dialogue with other churches goes back long before the beginning of the modern Ecumenical Movement. The Ecumenical Patriarch Joachim the 3 rd, after being installed as Patriarch of Constantinople in 1902, wrote to all Orthodox churches, raising the question as to whether the time had not come to prepare the way for the unity of all churches 3. Some years later, in 1920, the famous encyclical of the Ecumenical Patriarchate to all churches of Christ in the world was published, inviting them to a impartial and deeper historical study of doctrinal differences 4. 1 Acest referat a fost susţinut în cadrul întrunirii forului bilateral (Bilateral forum) a Comunităţilor Creştine Mondiale (World Christian Communions), desfăşurată la Breklum, Germania, între 10-15 martie 2008. 2 When there is no other indication, the phrase Orthodox Church or Orthodox churches is used in this text as referring to the Eastern Orthodox Church tradition. 3 The Orthodox Church in the Ecumenical Movement, Documents and Statements 1902-1975, edited by Constantine G. Patelos, WCC Geneva 1978, p. 30. 4 The Orthodox Church in the Ecumenical Movement, p. 42. 7
VIOREL IONITA Of utmost importance for the theological dialogues of the Orthodox churches with other churches were the decisions of the Pan-Orthodox Conferences, which began in 1961, after thorough preparation, under the leadership of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. The original purpose of these conferences was actually to prepare for an Orthodox Synod, which would take path-finding new decisions for the life of the Orthodox churches. At the first Pan-Orthodox Conference (24 September 1 October 1961, Rhodes, Greece), the relations to the other churches were considered according to the position of the respective churches in relation to the Orthodox Church 5. 1. Study of ways of bringing closer and uniting the Churches in a Pan-Orthodox perspective; in other words promoting the inter-orthodox co-operation; 2. Develop friendly relations to the lesser Ancient Oriental Churches, that means to the Oriental Orthodox Churches, in view to establishing union with them ; 3. Orthodoxy and the Roman Catholic Church: a) Study of the positive and negative points between the two Churches (in faith, in administration, in church activities especially propaganda, proselytising, the Uniatism; and b) Cultivation of relations in the spirit of Christian love, with particular reference to the points anticipated in the Patriarchal Encyclical of 1920; 4. Orthodoxy and the Churches and Confessions emanating from the Reformation: a) Confessions lying further from Orthodoxy (1. Lutheranism, 2. Calvinism; 3. Methodists and 4. Other Protestant Confessions), b) Confessions lying nearer to Orthodoxy (1. Anglican Church; 2. Episcopalians in general). Study of the best relations to cultivate and of drawing them closer, especially the Episcopalian and Anglican Churches, to the Orthodox Church, in the light of existing definite assumptions; 5. Orthodoxy and Old Catholicism; Advancement of relations with them in the spirit of former theological discussions and their started intentions and inclinations to unite with the Orthodox Church; 6. Orthodoxy and the Ecumenical Movement. According to this list the Anglican and the Old-Catholic Churches were counted in the category of the churches emanating from the Reformation. However, due to the ecumenical relations between the 5 The Orthodox Church in the Ecumenical Movement, pp. 71-72. 8
THE VISION OF UNITY... Orthodox churches and these two churches since the end of the 19th century, the Anglicans and the Old-Catholics were regarded as confessions lying nearer to Orthodoxy. At the 1966 preparatory conference in Belgrade, the foundation was laid for a dialogue between the Orthodox churches and the Anglican Communion, as well as between the Orthodox churches and the Old Catholic churches of the Union of Utrecht. The fourth Pan-Orthodox Conference (5-15 June 1968, Chambésy, Switzerland) decided to found an Inter-Orthodox Commission for dialogue with the Lutheran World Federation (LWF). The official visit of a delegation from the World Alliance of Reformed Churches (WARC) to the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Constantinople in July 1979 marked the preparation for the start of the official theological dialogue between the Orthodox churches and WARC. Thus the conditions for dialogue between the Orthodox churches and the churches of the Reformation were given, continuing the many contacts and conversations between Orthodoxy and Protestantism since the 16th century 6. Based on these Pan-Orthodox decisions, initiatives were taken by the Ecumenical Patriarchate to enter into the following theological dialogues: 1. Orthodox Anglican (since 1973); 2. Orthodox Old Catholic (from 1975 to 1987); 3. Orthodox Roman Catholic (since 1980); 4. Orthodox LWB (since 1981); 5. Eastern Orthodox Oriental Orthodox (from 1985 to 1993); 6. Orthodox WARC (since 1988). The fourth Pan-Orthodox Conference had also decided that the theological dialogue with the Lutheran churches in particular should be prepared, in a first phase, by the autocephalous Orthodox churches in bilateral conversations with various Evangelical churches. This decision was reaffirmed by the first Pan-Orthodox Pre-Conciliar Conference in 1976 7. This laid down the pan-orthodox basis for the bilateral theological dialogues between the various Orthodox churches and Evangelical ones 6 Athanasios BASDEKIS, Die Orthodoxe Kirche. Eine Handreichung für nicht-orthodoxe und orthodoxe Christen und Kirchen (The Orthodox Church. A Handbook for non- Orthodox and Orthodox Christians and Churches), Frankfurt am Main, Otto Lembeck Press, 2001, p. 24. 7 See Irenikon, L, 1977, nr. 1, pp. 99-100. 9
VIOREL IONITA at the regional level 8. Besides these theological dialogues at the regional level, it should be noted that there are also theological conversations between Orthodox and different other churches at the national level 9. For 8 In this category are the following bilateral theological dialogues: 1. Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD) and the Russian Orthodox Church, since 1959, known as the Arnoldshain conversations after the place where the first meeting was held. The most important topics in this dialogue have been: 1. Salvation; 2. Word and Sacrament; 3. Eucharistic Fellowship and 4. Service and Witness in the Church; 2. EKD and Ecumenical Patriarchate, since 1969, known also as the Constantinople Dialogue. Various aspects of Ecclesiology have been discussed, such as 1. Eucharist, Church and Ministry or 2. The Holy Spirit in the life of the church; 3. EKD and Bulgarian Orthodox Church, since 1992. This dialogue began in 1978 as a bilateral dialogue between the Bulgarian Orthodox Church and the Federation of Protestant Churches in the German Democratic Republic. Known as the Herrnhuter conversations, this dialogue dealt with topics as: 1. Proclamation of the Gospel; 2. the Source of Faith; 3. Baptism and Eucharist; and 4. the Ordained Ministry. 4. EKD and Romanian Orthodox Church, since 1979, known as the Goslar conversations. Topics discussed have been: 1. Scripture and Tradition; 2. Different aspects of the Sacraments; 3. Justification, Theosis and Synergia. The issue of ecclesiology was also discussed. At the 10th meeting between the two churches in Cluj (Romania, 14-20 November 2002), the theme was The Nature and the Unity of the Church of Christ the Historical Difference between the Churches. The final statement of this meeting described the relation between the two churches as follows: Although our churches are still on the way towards full mutual recognition and therefore towards acceptance of eucharistic fellowship, neither wishes to deny that the other is, in principle, a church. So the Romanian Orthodox Church can clearly recognise in the EKD a way of being church. On the basis of our common faith in Jesus Christ, as authoritatively expressed in the Holy Scriptures and in our common Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, and especially on the basis of baptism, the Romanian Orthodox Church can also speak of a certain degree of fellowship with the EKD from which it is still divided. And, for its part, the EKD, despite the sometimes very different forms of expression of church life in the Orthodox churches, can see in these churches the realisation of essential elements of being church in accordance with the Gospel. 5. The Russian Orthodox Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland, since 1970. This dialogue, known as the Sinnappi conversations, has treated among others the following themes: 1. Eucharist; 2. Salvation; 3. Peace and Social Ethics. 9 Such as: - the dialogue between the Orthodox Church and Evangelical Lutheran Church in Finland; - Lutheran, Reformed and Orthodox in Romania; - Orthodox-Protestant in France; - Orthodox-Protestant in Switzerland. It should also be mentioned that theological conversations have taken place between Orthodox and Lutherans in the United States and in Australia. For all these dialogues, 10
THE VISION OF UNITY... a complete image of the Orthodox vision of the church unity all the dialogues at world, regional and national level should be taken into consideration. This both for the sake of accountability between the different dialogues, as well as for the fact that some of the regional or national dialogues achieved more concrete results as the dialogues at the world level. The issue of the church unity has been dealt with in some of these bilateral theological conversations but we won t find in these dialogues a thorough debate about unity as it is the case of the Lutheran- Reformed or the Anglican-Lutheran dialogues. In spite of that the purpose of the Orthodox dialogues with other churches is to achieve the visible unity between the respective churches. In this respect all the themes discussed in these dialogues are to be considered as stages towards a better approach of the unity. Finally, the dialogues of the Orthodox Churches with other churches around the world at all levels relate in a way or another to the multilateral dialogues. There are first of all dialogues of the Orthodox Churches with other churches which have been facilitated by the WCC Faith and Order Commission, such as the dialogue between the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox Churches, at least in the first stage of the unofficial conversations. On the other hand several statements of some Orthodox-Lutheran dialogues (e.g. EKD-Rumanian Orthodox Church) are making references to the documents produced by the Faith and Order Commission. The Vision of Unity in the multilateral dialogues. Some Orthodox remarks It is well known that the Orthodox participants at the first World Conference on Faith and Order (Lausanne, 1927) could not subscribe to all decisions taken there and presented a separate statement 10. The Orthodox considered that they can not entertain the idea of a reunion which is confined to a few common points of verbal statement; for according to the Orthodox Church where the totality of faith is absent see Risto SAARINEN, Faith and Holiness. Lutheran Orthodox Dialogues 1959-1994, Göttingen, Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1997. 10 Lukas Vischer indicated the fact that the Orthodox gave up to publish a separate statement only at the fourth World Conference for Faith and Order in Montreal (1963) and underlined that the reservations in relation to the decisions take by this Commission expressed a lack of unanimity (Lukas VISCHER, Die Einheit der Kirche (The Unity of the Church), CHR, Kaiser Verlag München, 1962, p. 24. 11
VIOREL IONITA there can be no communio in sacris 11. The Orthodox vision of unity, or of reunion with other churches, according to the terminology of Lausanne, can not be developed by neglecting or putting by side the doctrinal differences between churches. According to the Orthodox understanding, the unity we seek is to be achieved through the discussion of doctrinal and practical differences between churches. In their statement from Lausanne the Orthodox underlined that reunion can take place only on the basis of the common faith and confession of the ancient, undivided Church of the seven Ecumenical Councils and of the first eight centuries 12. The model of the unity of the Church in the first Christian Millennium does not mean a return back, in time, but an effort to achieve the presence of Christ as a whole (totus Christus) in the inner live of all believers and of all Churches. For Dumitru Stàniloae, one of the most representative theologians of the Romanian Orthodox Church (1903-1993), the reestablishing (Wiederherstellung) of the visible unity of the Church is not merely an external matter, but an internal one, which seeks the existential confessing of faith in the integral Christ and of His revelation and not only a part of it 13. The Orthodox statement at the second World Conference on Faith and Order (Edinburgh, 1937) brought some new elements about the Orthodox position by underlining that they cherish the conviction that only the dogmatic teaching of the ancient Church as it is found in the Holy Scriptures, the Creed, the decisions of the ecumenical Synods and the teaching of the Fathers and in the worship and whole life of the undivided Church, can form a solid basis for dealing successfully and rightly with the new problems of doctrine and theology which have arisen in recent times 14. 11 The Orthodox Church in the Ecumenical Movement, p. 81. 12 The Orthodox Church in the Ecumenical Movement, p. 81. 13 See Dumitru STÀNILOAE, Orthodoxe Dogmatik, II. Band, aus dem Rumänischen übersetzt von Hermann Pitters, Benziger Verlag, 1990, p. 207; see also rev. Prof. Dr. Viorel IONITA, God, in Your Grace, Transform the Church and the Churches. Ecclesiology, Unity, Koinonia, in Grace in Abundance. Orthodox Reflections on the Way to Porto Alegre, edited by Metropolitan Gennadios of Sassima, WCC Publications, Geneva, 2005, pp. 49-56. 14 The Orthodox Church in the Ecumenical Movement, p. 85. 12
THE VISION OF UNITY... This understanding of the basis for unity has been also the starting point for the Orthodox churches in their dialogue with other churches until today. When the World Council of Churches was established in 1948, the Orthodox Churches were among those concerned about the relationship between the council and its member churches. Therefore, the Orthodox appreciated the statement of the WCC Central Committee in Toronto (1950) on The Church, the Churches and the World Council of Churches. The Ecclesiological Significance of the World Council of Churches. According to this statement the purpose of the World Council of Churches is not to negotiate unions between churches, which can only be done by the churches themselves acting on their own initiative, but to bring the churches into living contact with each other and to promote the study and discussion of the issues of Church unity 15. In Orthodox perspective this was a necessary clarification for the relationship between the multilateral and the bilateral dialogues. The role of the WCC is to offer the platform for discussion about the unity, while the negotiations of unity are the exclusive role of the churches through bilateral dialogues. The WCC Assembly in New Delhi (1961) 16, when several Orthodox Churches became members of the world-wide ecumenical family, adopted the first statement on unity of the church at that level. This statement expressed the view that the unity which is both God s will and his gift to his Church is being made visible as all in each place who are baptized into Jesus Christ and confess him as Lord and Saviour are brought by the Holy Spirit into one fully committed fellowship, holding the one apostolic faith preaching the one Gospel, breaking the one bread, joining in common prayer, and having a corporate life reaching out in witness and service to all and who at the same time are united with the whole Christian fellowship in all places and all ages in such wise that ministry and members are accepted by all, and that all can act and 15 www.wcc-coe.org What the World Council of Churches is not, 2 nd paragraph. 16 Sharing the vision of Lukas Vischer (cfr. Die Einheit der Kirche, p. 20) that the statements of the General Assemblies of the WCC are more representative than the texts elaborated by the Faith and Order Commission we will take into consideration only the first ones. Nevertheless, we will take into consideration two texts produced by the WCC Faith and Order Commission. 13
VIOREL IONITA speak together as occasion requires for the tasks to which God calls his people 17. In relation to this statement the Orthodox underlined that they cannot accept the idea of a parity of denomination and cannot visualise Christian Reunion just as an interdenominational adjustment. The unity has been broken and must be recovered. The Orthodox Church is not a confession, one of many, one among the many. For the Orthodox, the Orthodox Church is just the Church 18. In the same response the Orthodox indicated that for them the immediate objective of the ecumenical search is a reintegration of Christian mind, a recovery of apostolic tradition, a fullness of Christian vision and belief, in agreement with all ages 19. Finally, the New Delhi statement on unity rightly underlined the significance of the local church, but it did not take enough into consideration the relationship between the local and universal dimensions of the Church. The fourth WCC Assembly (Uppsala, Sweden, 1968) adopted the second statement in relation to the church unity through the document: The Holy Spirit and the Catholicity of the Church, in which a special chapter was dedicated to The Quest for Unity of the Whole Church. Taking into account the theological development after New Delhi and probably also the critic on the shortcuts of the statement from 1961, the Uppsala statement indicated that to the emphasis on all in each place we would now add a fresh understanding of the unity of all Christians in all places. This calls the churches in all places to realize that they belong together and are called to act together. In a time when human interdependence is so evident, it is the more imperative to make visible the bonds which unite Christians in universal fellowship 20. The most important contribution of the Uppsala statement was to have underlined the link between the unity and the catholicity of the church, which is a gift of the Spirit, but it is also a task, a call and an 17 The New Delhi Report, ed. W. A. Visser t Hooft, London, SCM, 1962, 2, p. 116. 18 The New Delhi Report, p. 116. 19 New Delhi Statement on Unity, and Orthodox Response Third Assembly of the WCC, New Delhi, 1961; www.wcc-coe.org/wcc/who/crete-02-e.html. 20 The Uppsalla Report, ed. Norman Goodall, WCC 1968, p. 17. 14
THE VISION OF UNITY... engagement 21. In the introduction to the theme of this report the then Bishop Karekin Sarkissian, the late Catholicos of all Armenians, underlined that the great merit of this document is that it makes us look ahead for a genuine understanding of catholicity 22. In fact, from an Orthodox perspective the Unity of the Church can not be considered separately from her Holiness, Catholicity and Apostolicity. A true vision of the unity can be developed only in connection with the other three marks of the church. A second contribution of the statement from 1968 was the link between the Unity of the Church and the Unity of the Mankind. The participants at this assembly declared that when we consider the vision of unity granted to this generation and the resources of God s bounty available for the enrichment of mankind, we become newly aware of the tragic character of the divisions that separate us, including the divisions among us at this Assembly 23. According to the Orthodox understanding the Church has been created by God to embrace the whole humankind. Therefore, there is a direct connection between the unity of the two entities. Nevertheless, the unity of the church can not be dependent of the unity of humankind. It is rather the unity of the church which gives a sense to the unity of humankind, even though this is not always visible. It should be also noted that the Uppsala statement speaks alternatively about the unity of all Christians and the unity of the Church. In the sixthies there was a very vivid debate among the Romanian Orthodox theologians whether the unity of Christians is not easier to be reached as the unity of the churches. The results of this debate were that the unity of the Christians could be reduced to a social enterprise, therefore, the unity we are speaking about is only the unity of the church, because the Christians can not be united in Christ without the church. Being in Christ means being a member of the body of Christ which is the church. The Uppsala statement made also a recommendation to help the implementation of the unity at the world level. First of all the statement considered that the clearest obstacle to manifestation of the churches universality is their inability to understand the measure in which they already belong together in one body 24. In this respect the member 21 The Uppsalla Report, p. 13. 22 The Uppsalla Report, p. 7. 23 The Uppsalla Report, p.18. 24 The Uppsalla Report, p. 17. 15
VIOREL IONITA churches of the World Council of Churches were invited to work for the time when a genuinely universal council may once more speak for all Christians, and lead the way into the future 25. The difficulty with this recommendation was first of all linked to the idea of a possible authority outside or above the churches, which could decide the unity of the church. Another difficulty would have been to convene such a council. If the WCC would have been developed in that direction it would have been in contradiction with the Toronto declaration. The third statement on church unity taken by a WCC Assembly was in Nairobi (1975) under the title What Unity Requires. Taking into account the work done by the Faith and Order Commission, the Nairobi Assembly launched the concept of conciliar fellowship in order to describe the unity we seek. The statement adopted in 1975 stated that the term conciliar fellowship has been frequently misunderstood. It does not look towards a conception of unity different from that full organic unity sketched in the New Delhi statement, but is rather a further elaboration of it. The term is intended to describe an aspect of the life of the one undivided Church at all levels 26. Since the statement indicates that true conciliar fellowship presupposes the unity of the Church, this concept is not a vision about how divided churches could reach the unity, but rather a description of that stage, which the churches did not reach yet. For the late metropolitan Paulos Mar Gregorios, one of the leaders of WCC in his time, the vague slogan conciliar fellowship is not luminous enough to show the way 27. In this respect from an Orthodox perspective the concept of conciliar fellowship is not a vision of unity which should help the churches on their way towards this unity. Nevertheless, if we relate the concept of conciliar fellowship to the previous discussion on catholicity, the Nairobi statement went a step further in relation to the debate about catholicity raised at Uppsala. The progress registered at Nairobi comes from the explanation of this concept which refers to a quality of life within each local church; it underlines the fact that true unity is not 25 The Uppsalla Report, p. 17. 26 Breaking Barriers, Nairobi 1975: Official Report, Fifth Assembly, World Council of Churches, ed. David M. Paton, London SPCK, and WCC, 1976, p. 60. 27 Paulos Mar GREGORIOS, On Ecumenism, edited by Fr. Dr. Jacob Kurian, ISPCK & MGF, Kottayam, 2006, p. 110. 16
THE VISION OF UNITY... monolithic, does not override the special gifts given to each member and each local church, but rather cherishes and protect them 28. The fourth statement on unity adopted by a WCC Assembly was in Canberra (1991) 29 under the title: The Unity of the Church: Gift and Calling. This statement underlines in paragraph 2.1 that the unity of the Church to which we are called is a koinonia given and expressed in the common confession of the apostolic faith; a common sacramental life entered by the one baptism and celebrated together in one eucharistic fellowship; a common life in which members and ministries are mutually recognised and reconciled; and a common mission witnessing to all people to the gospel of God s grace and serving the whole of creation. The goal of the search for full communion is realized when all the churches are able to recognize in one another the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church in its fullness. This full communion will be expressed on the local and the universal levels through conciliar forms of life and action. In such communion churches are bound in all aspects of their life together at all levels in confessing the one faith and engaging in worship and witness, deliberation and action 30. Taking into account the development in the discussion on the relationship between the unity of the Church and the unity of the world, the Orthodox representatives in Canberra published some reflections underlining that the Orthodox Churches want to emphasize that for them, the main aim of the WCC must be the restoration of the unity of the Church. This aim does not exclude relating Church unity with the wider unity of humanity and creation. On the contrary, the unity of Christians will contribute more effectively to the unity of humanity and the world. Yet the latter must not happen at the expense of solving issues of faith and order, which divide Christians. Visible unity, in both the faith and the 28 GREGORIOS, On Ecumenism, p. 60. 29 See some Orthodox contributions in Come, Holy Spirit, Renew the Whole Creation. An Orthodox Approach for the Seventh Assembly of the World Council of Churches, Canberra, Australia, 6-21 February 1991, edited by Gennadios Limouris, Holy Cross Orthodox Press, Brookline, Massachusetts, 1990, 263 p. 30 www.oikoumene.org/?id=2633. 2 17
VIOREL IONITA structure of the Church, constitutes a specific goal and must not be taken for granted 31. We consider these comments a good link between the Uppsala statement and the Canberra discussions on unity. In relation to the Canberra statement we value in it the fact that the unity of the Church is put in relationship with the other three marks of the Church. Secondly this statement uses the concept of koinonia, which was further developed at the last World Conference for Faith and Order (Santiago de Compostela, Spain, 3-14 August 1993). The final message of that conference speaks about The koinonia we seek and which we have experienced ; This koinonia which we share ; The koinonia we experience as well as about The deeper koinonia which is our goal and which will be a sign of hope for all. We notice here a very variable understanding of koinonia, which on one hand the Churches are seeking, and on the other hand they have already experienced. We fully agree with the message from Compostela when it underlines that in the New Testament The basic verbal form from which the noun koinonia derives means to have something in common, to share, to participate, to have part in, to act together or to be in a contractual relationship involving obligations of mutual accountability. The word koinonia appears in key situations, for example, the reconciliation of Paul with Peter, James and John (Gal 2:9), the collection for the poor (Rom. 15:26; 2 Cor 8:4), the experience and witness of the Church (Acts 2:42-45). Though we have to accept that today the term koinonia 32 is in danger of losing its original meaning. In the end it is important how we 31 Orthodox Visions of Ecumenism. Statements, Messages and Reports on the Ecumenical Movement 1902-1992, compiled by Gennadios Limouris, WCC Publications, Geneva, 1994, p. 177. 32 It should be mentioned here that next to the concept of koinonia the Orthodox Churches of slavonic tradition are using the term of Sobornost, Which is the community conscience which interrelates unity, catholicity and conciliarity. It is the principle of spiritual unity and the understanding of the power of koinonia to transcend all that divides, alienates and segregates, to sustain harmony and diversity in common faith and life, to combine Christian freedom with church authority, structure with movement (cfr. Todor SABEV, The Orthodox Churches in the World Council of Churches. Towards the Future, WCC Publications, Geneva, 1996, p. 61). 18
THE VISION OF UNITY... really understand that notion for the relationship between the Churches today, or even between the different Churches within the WCC. His Eminence Metropolitan John of Pergamon, noticing already some years ago that the concept of koinonia is gaining ground in the agenda of the WCC, and this is a good thing, explained that it is in any case important to underline the critical significance of this concept for the Ecumenical Movement. Orthodox ecclesiology will have to make a crucial contribution on this matter, on which, I personally believe, confessed His Eminence the future of the Ecumenical Movement will depend a great deal 33. For Konrad Raiser, the change in the language (der sprachliche Wandel) from unity to koinonia focussed more on the quality of the communion as on the consensus or convergence 34. The Faith and Order Paper The Nature and Purpose of the Church develops further the notion of koinonia and underlines that The notion of koinonia (communion) has become fundamental for revitalising a common understanding of the nature of the Church and its visible unity 35. This paper, which is the most comprehensive ecclesiological document so far at the world level, summarises somehow the discussions on this topic at ecumenical level. The document distinguishes between the Church of the Triune God and the Church in History. The challenge of the unity we seek is to find ways, which could link the two aspects of the church, that means the Church as created by the Triune God and the church as exists in the history. In paragraph 52 the paper underlines that The oneness, holiness, catholicity and apostolicity of the Church are God s gifts and are essential attributes of the Church s nature and mission. However, there is a continual tension in the historical life of the Church between that which is already given and that which is not yet fully realised 36. 33 See www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org. 34 Konrad RAISER, Der Ökumenische Rat der Kirchen im Dienst der sichtbaren Einheit der Kirche. Bilanz und Perspektiven. Vorlesungsreihe an der Universität Fribourg, Repères oecuméniques Ökumenische Wegzeichen, No. 13, Fribourg CH, 2003, p. 14. 35 The Nature and Purpose of the Church. A Stage on the Way to a Common Statement. Faith and Order Paper 198, World Council of Churches, Geneva, 2005, p. 28. 36 The Nature and Purpose of the Church, p. 31 19
VIOREL IONITA Since the Orthodox Church identifies itself with the Church of the Triune God, for the Orthodox there is no tension between the two forms of being church, because they are one and the same. The Orthodox contribution in relation to an Eucharistic Ecclesiology during the last century helps us to understand that the identification of the Orthodox Church with the Church of the Triune God is not an arrogance. This is first of all an expression of its understanding as an unbroken apostolic tradition. At the same time the Orthodox Church is confident that the Lord will remain with her though the ages until the end of the time. In relation to the unity, the Faith and Order ecclesiological paper underlines that the essential oneness which belongs to the very nature of the Church, and is already given to it in Jesus Christ, stands in contrast to the actual divisions within and between the churches. Yet in spite of all divisions the unity given to the Church is already manifest in the one Gospel present in all churches, and appears in many features of their lives (cf. Eph 4:4-5; 1 Tim 2:5; Acts 4:12). The unfortunate divisions among the churches are due partly to sin, and partly to a sincere attempt of Christians to be faithful to the truth. Working for the unity of the Church means working for fuller visible embodiment of the oneness that belongs to its nature 37. If the divisions among the churches are due even partly to sin, then the way towards unity should go through repentance and recognition of the sins done in the history. Coming back to the statements made at the level of the WCC assemblies we should mention that the fifth and last statement adopted at that level was in Porto Alegre (2006). There was launched an invitation to the churches to renew their commitment to the search for unity and to deepen their dialogue under the title: Called to be the One Church. The fourth paragraph of this statement states: We confess one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church as expressed in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (381). The Church s oneness is an image of the unity of the Triune God in the communion of the divine Persons. Holy scripture describes the Christian community as the body of Christ whose interrelated diversity is essential to its wholeness: Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and 37 The Nature and Purpose of the Church, p. 31. 20
THE VISION OF UNITY... there are varieties of services, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good (1 Cor. 12:4-7). Thus, as the people of God, the body of Christ, and the temple of the Holy Spirit, the Church is called to manifest its oneness in rich diversity 38. In the Orthodox perspective the reference to the creed from 381, which means without Filoque, is the best starting point for the discussion on the church unity. In this statement all the four marks of the church are not only considered in a coherent way, but also theologically developed. The statement addresses to all churches some concrete questions 39. Through these questions, the churches will be challenged to recognise areas for renewal in their own lives, and new opportunities to deepen relations with those of other traditions 40. The statement concludes in the confidence that the risen Christ will continue to disclose himself as he did in the breaking of bread at Emmaus, and that he will unveil the deeper meaning of fellowship and communion (Luke 24.13-35) 41. The value of the Porto Alegre statement is based on its clarity and comprehensiveness in a short form. On the other hand it challenges the churches with a series of concrete questions which may bring the debate about unity a step forward. 38 www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/assembly/porto-alegre-2006/1- statements-documents-adopted/christian-unity. 39 Among the questions to be addressed continually by the churches are these: a. To what extent can your church discern the faithful expression of the apostolic faith in its own life, prayer, and witness and in that of other churches? b. Where does your church perceive fidelity to Christ in the faith and life of other churches? c. Does your church recognize a common pattern of Christian initiation, grounded in baptism, in the life of other churches? d. Why does your church believe that it is necessary, or permissible, or not possible to share the Lord s Supper with those of other churches? e. In what ways is your church able to recognize the ordered ministries of other churches? f. To what extent can your church share the spirituality of other churches? g. How will your church stand with other churches to contend with problems such as social and political hegemonies, persecution, oppression, poverty, and violence? h. To what extent will your church share with other churches in the apostolic mission? i. To what extent does your church share with other churches in faith formation and theological education? j. How fully can your church share in prayer with other churches? 40 www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/assembly/porto-alegre-2006/1- statements-documents-adopted/christian-unity. 41 www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/assembly/porto-alegre-2006/1- statements-documents-adopted/christian-unity. 21
VIOREL IONITA Finally we should add that talking about multilateral dialogues we should not oversee the other form of bilateral cooperation mainly at the regional level (the Regional Ecumenical Organisations REO s) as well as at national/local level (the National Councils of Churches NCC s). These organisations do promote through different projects and papers the debate about the church unity. The REO s and the NCC s are sometimes the channels between the worldwide level and the regional-national-local one. In this respect we should mention only two documents. The first one is the Charta Oecumenica, launched by the Conference of European Churches together with the Council of European Bishops Conferences in April 2001. The first chapter of this Charta, under the title Called Together to Unity in Faith, states: With the Gospel of Jesus Christ, according to the witness of Holy Scripture and as expressed in the ecumenical Nicene- Constantinopolitan Creed of 381, we believe in the Triune God: the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Because we here confess one, holy, catholic and apostolic church our paramount ecumenical task is to show forth this unity, which is always a gift of God 42. The second example is a collection of biblical texts on unity called One Light One World, edited by John Bradley and published by the Churches Together in England, as a contribution to the centenary of the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity in January 2008. This booklet is highlighting some scripture passages encouraging our unity 43. Through such initiatives the local congregations are taken into the process of thinking about and praying for the unity of all churches, then they have also an important task in this respect 44. 42 Charta Oecumenica. A Text, a Process and a Dream of the Churches in Europe, edited by Viorel Ionita and Sarah Numico, WCC Publications, Geneva, 2003, p. 8. 43 www.churches-together.net/publisher/article.aspx?id=63777. 44 See Local Ecumenism. How Church Unity is seen and practised by Congregations, edited by André Birmelé, World Council of Churches, Geneva, 1982. 22
THE VISION OF UNITY... The Vision of Unity in the bilateral dialogues of the Orthodox Churches with other churches Orthodox Anglican The Anglican-Orthodox dialogue started in Oxford (1973) and decided from the beginning not to adopt statements at each meeting, but to work on the chosen themes until they are mature to be adopted as common statement. The meetings in between used to adopt reports, which constituted the basis for the agreed statements. According to this methodology from 1973 until 2006 three statements were adopted: 1. The Moscow Agreed Statement (1976); 2) the Dublin Agreed Statement (1984); and 3) the Cyprus Agreed Statement (2006). If the first statement is rather short (6 pages), the second and the third ones are very elaborated, with a preface, an introduction and footnotes, including the list of the participants during the whole period of work on the respective document. At the end of the first meeting in Oxford it was decided that the debates for common doctrinal discussions between the Orthodox Church and the Anglican Church should be continued in three sub-commissions, in 1974 and 1975, each commission having the obligation to discuss one of the three proposed subjects: 1. Inspiration and Revelation in Holy Scriptures; 2. The Synod s Authority; 3. The Church as Eucharistic Community 45. In the light of this work, the Moscow statement contains the following topics: I the Knowledge of God; II. The Inspiration and Authority of Holy Scripture; III. Scripture and Tradition; IV. The Authority of the Council; V. The Filioque Clause; VI. The Church as the Eucharistic Community and VII. The Invocation of the Holy Spirit in the Eucharist. The Moscow statement ends with the following note: At their meeting in Thessaloniki in April 1977 the Orthodox members asked that it should be pointed out that, in regard to the words in paragraph 30 of the Moscow Agreed Statement it is inexact to call the Epiclesis a formula since the Orthodox Church does not regard it as such 46. 45 Rev. Prof. Dr. Ioan Mircea IELCIU, Notes on the Anglican-Orthodox Theological Dialogue, Reseptio, Helsinki, 1/2006, p. 12. 46 www.anglicancommunion.org/ministry/ecumenical/resources/index.cfm. 23
VIOREL IONITA According to this statement the Anglican-Orthodox dialogue started with some hermeneutic and introductory questions. Talking about matters of the authority of the council, that means of the Ecumenical Councils, the Anglican-Orthodox dialogue discussed about the Filoque in the Nicene- Constantinopolitan creed. The result of these discussions was that The question of the origin of the Holy Spirit is to be distinguished from that of his mission to the world. It is with reference to the mission of the Spirit that we are to understand the biblical texts which speak both of the Father (John 14.26) and of the Son (John 15.26) as sending (pempein) the Holy Spirit 47. that: In the light of this common view, the Anglican members agreed (a) because the original form of the Creed referred to the origin of the Holy Spirit from the Father; (b) because the Filioque clause was introduced into this Creed without the authority of an Ecumenical Council and without due regard for Catholic consent, and (c) because this Creed constitutes the public confession of faith by the People of God in the Eucharist, the Filioque clause should not be included in this Creed 48. This shows that the Anglican-Orthodox dialogue could only halfway solve the problem of Filoque that means only in relation to the formal aspect of the introduction of this formula into the creed from 381. The real question of the relationship between the Son and the Spirit in the Holy Trinity remained open. In relation to the Moscow statement we would like to underline also the chapter about the Church as the Eucharistic Community. First of all the statement notes the six points of the Bucharest Conference of 1935, about the validity of the Anglican ordinations. In the paragraph 24 of this statement we find a very good description of the relationship between the Eucharist and the Church: 47 www.anglicancommunion.org/ministry/ecumenical/resources/index.cfm. 48 www.anglicancommunion.org/ministry/ecumenical/resources/index.cfm. 24
THE VISION OF UNITY... The Eucharist actualizes the Church. The Christian community has a basic sacramental character. The Church can be described as a synaxis or an ecclesia, which is, in its essence, a worshipping and eucharistic assembly. The Church is not only built up by the Eucharist, but is also a condition for it. Therefore one must be a believing member of the Church in order to receive the Holy Communion. The Church celebrating the Eucharist becomes fully itself; that is koinonia, fellowship communion. The Church celebrates the Eucharist as the central act of its existence, in which the ecclesial community, as a living reality confessing its faith, receives its realization 49. These considerations show that this dialogue reflected just from the beginning the new developments in the Orthodox theology especially in relation to the Eucharistic Ecclesiology. The Dublin statement starts with a preface, in which a reference is made to the late Archbishop Basil of Brussels, who remarked that the aim of our Dialogue is that we may eventually be visible united in one Church. The introduction of about three pages explains then the whole process of this dialogue even from the beginning until 1984. The statement itself starts with the following explanation about the Method and Approach: In our discussions since the adoption of the Moscow Agreed Statement, and especially during the last four years, our Joint Commission has endeavoured to keep constantly in mind the essential link that exists between theology and sanctification through prayer, between doctrine and the daily life of the Christian community. Keenly aware how dangerous it is to discuss the Christian faith in an abstract manner, we have sought always to understand how theological principles are expressed in the living experience of the people of God 50. This is a very important reference for the spiritual atmosphere in this dialogue. The Dublin statement deals with the following themes: I. The Mystery of the Church; II. Faith in the Trinity, Prayer and Holiness; III. 49 www.anglicancommunion.org/ministry/ecumenical/resources/index.cfm. 50 Growth in Agreement II. Reports and Agreed Statements of Ecumenical Conversations on a World Level, 1982-1998, edited by Jeffrey Gros, FSC, Harding Meyer and William G. Rusch, WCC Publications, Geneva, 2000, pp. 84-85. 25
VIOREL IONITA Worship and Tradition and ends with an Epilogue. For this study the most important is the first part on the Mystery of the Church, out of which we will consider mainly the chapter: 1. The Mark of the Church and 2. Communion and Intercommunion. In the paragraph 8 there is a common confession of the two parts to the unity of the one Church in Christ: In the Creed we proclaim the Church to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic. The Church is one, because there is a one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all (Eph. 4.5), and it participates in the life of the Holy Trinity, one God in three persons. The unity of the Church is expressed in common faith and in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit; it takes concrete and visible form as the Church, gathered round the bishop in the common celebration of the Holy Eucharist, proclaims Christ's death till he comes (1 Cor. 11.26). The unity of Christians with Christ in baptism is a unity of love and mutual respect which transcends all human division, of race, social status and sex (Gal. 3.28). This unity in Christ is God s gift to the world by which men and women may learn to live in unity with one another, accepting one another as Christ has accepted them 51. In respect to the unity of the church the Dublin statement makes a reference to the situation of the historical churches by underlining that we find ourselves in an abnormal situation. We are a disrupted Christian people seeking to restore our unity. Our divisions do not destroy but they damage the basic unity we have in Christ, and our disunity impedes our mission to the world as well as our relationships with each other. Anglicans are accustomed to seeing our divisions as within the Church: they do not believe that they alone are the one true Church, but they believe that they belong to it. Orthodox, however, believe that the Orthodox Church is the one true Church of Christ, which as his Body is not and cannot be divided. But at the same time they see Anglicans as brothers and sisters in Christ who are seeking with them the union of all Christians in the one Church 52. The two ecclesiological views are here very clear exposed and their hope is to find together the unity in Christ. 51 Growth in Agreement II, pp. 85-86. 52 Growth in Agreement II, p. 86. 26