Orthodox conciliarity and the role of the patriarchs

Program / Course 11: Church, Sacraments, and Authority / Lesson 4.3

What you will learn

• Describe how authority is organized in the Orthodox Church: bishops, synods, patriarchs and councils.
• Explain the idea of the first among equals and the meaning of autocephaly.
• State the Orthodox objections to the papal claims.
• Describe the difficulties that Catholics and others raise, and recent tests such as the Council of Crete and the Ukrainian question.

The big idea

The Orthodox Church is a communion of self-governing churches, each led by a bishop or a synod of bishops, with no single head over all. Highest authority lies in the bishops together in council, and the church as a whole receives what they teach. Patriarchs and primates have honor and special duties, and the bishop of Constantinople holds a first place of honor, but not a universal power. Orthodox Christians say this order is the model of the early church. Critics ask how it deals with deep disputes, and recent events have put the question to the test.

Key terms

Conciliarity

The principle that the church is governed and the faith defined by bishops gathered in council, with the whole church receiving their decisions.

Autocephalous

From Greek words meaning self-headed. An autocephalous church elects its own primate and governs itself.

Patriarch

A title for the senior bishop of a major church. Historically there were five: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem.

Synod

A standing or occasional gathering of bishops to govern the church.

First among equals

A phrase for a primacy of honor and coordination that does not remove the equality of the bishops.

Ecumenical Patriarch

The title of the archbishop of Constantinople. He holds first place of honor among Orthodox bishops.

Canon

A rule of church order or discipline, usually issued by a council.

Background

The early church was often organized around the main cities of the Roman Empire. By the fifth century the five great sees, Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem, were called patriarchates and were seen by some writers as a pentarchy. When the East and West drifted apart, Rome left the pentarchy as a communion, and the four eastern patriarchates remained with others added later, including Moscow in 1589, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria and Georgia. Today there are around fourteen autocephalous Orthodox churches, and the exact count depends on whether some recent claims are recognized.

The Orthodox model is not a monarchy and not a federation. Each bishop is responsible for his diocese and shares with all bishops in the care for the whole church. Orthodox writers appeal to Acts 15, to Cyprian’s teaching that there is one episcopate in which each bishop has a share, and to the first seven ecumenical councils. This lesson describes how the model is supposed to work, and where it is under strain.

Step-by-step explanation

Step 1: Bishops and synods

In Orthodox teaching, every bishop is a successor of the apostles and has equal sacramental rank. A bishop presides over the Eucharist in his local church, which is complete in itself because Christ is fully present there. Bishops are bound to each other by communion in the same faith. Decisions of general importance are made by synods of bishops. Apostolic Canon 34, an early collection of church rules, says that the bishops of each nation should recognize the first among them, and do nothing of importance without his consent, and that he should do nothing without theirs.

The canon is often cited as a model of how primacy and conciliarity relate. The first bishop leads and coordinates, and the others consent. Orthodox writers extend the idea to the whole church, with the Ecumenical Patriarch in the first place.

Step 2: The ecumenical councils

The Orthodox recognize seven ecumenical councils, from Nicaea in 325 to the Second Council of Nicaea in 787. Some Orthodox writers speak of further councils, such as the synods of the fourteenth century that approved Gregory Palamas’s teaching on the uncreated light, as having ecumenical standing. The matter is not settled by any official definition. The Orthodox do not hold that a council is infallible just because it meets. They say that a council is true if it expresses the faith of the church and is received by the faithful.

Emperors called the early councils, and many Orthodox writers regard this as a historical circumstance and not a requirement. How the bishops of the Orthodox churches can now call a council without an emperor is a practical question. Over the twentieth century the churches organized pan-Orthodox meetings that prepared a major council.

Step 3: Patriarchs and autocephaly

Patriarchs are bishops with the duty to coordinate the bishops of a large region, to preside at synods and to speak for their churches. They do not have a right of jurisdiction over bishops in another patriarchate. Autocephalous churches are in communion with each other and recognize one another, yet each is independent in internal affairs. Constantinople has claimed the right to grant autocephaly to new churches, citing its place as first in honor and canons such as canon 28 of Chalcedon. Moscow and others dispute that claim.

The system has worked in the past by consensus. It is open to national and political pressures, and critics, including some Orthodox, say that national churches have too often served the interests of states. The Orthodox call this error phyletism, and a council of Constantinople in 1872 condemned it.

Step 4: Recent tests

The Holy and Great Council met in Crete in June 2016 after decades of preparation. Four of the fourteen churches, Antioch, Russia, Bulgaria and Georgia, did not attend, and the council’s documents have been received in different ways. In 2018 and 2019 Constantinople granted autocephaly to a church in Ukraine, which Moscow rejected, and the Russian church broke communion with Constantinople. Some other churches recognized the new church and others did not.

These events are described differently by different Orthodox writers. Some say they show that the Orthodox system still works through disputes, since reception takes time. Others say they show a failure of unity and the need for a clearer way to settle questions. This lesson does not judge between them, and any statement about current events should be checked against recent reliable sources.

Step 5: Orthodox objections to the papacy

The Orthodox raise several objections. First, that the early church knew no universal jurisdiction of Rome, and that the canons gave Rome first place because it was the capital. Second, that the councils did not need the pope’s approval to be valid, and the early councils were called by emperors. Third, that the definition of papal infallibility in 1870 removed the voice of the church as a whole. Fourth, that the Latin addition of the filioque to the creed was made without a council of the whole church. Catholic replies, given in the previous lesson, appeal to the Petrine texts and to Rome’s early role, and say that the filioque is a legitimate expression of the same faith. The Catholic and Orthodox churches continue an official theological dialogue on these questions.

1. Who is responsible for the faith in a local church, and who for the whole church?
2. How does the first among equals differ from a head?
3. What makes a council ecumenical, according to the Orthodox?
4. How is a dispute between two Orthodox churches settled?
5. What are the dangers of the Orthodox model, and what are the dangers of the Catholic one?
6. Which current event should be checked against a reliable up-to-date source?

Examples

Different perspectives

Orthodox

The church is a communion of equal bishops who govern together. Primacy exists among them, but it is a primacy of service and order. The unity of the church lies in the common faith and the Eucharist, and a council is true by being received. Orthodox writers acknowledge that national and political entanglements have caused real problems.

Catholic

Catholics recognize the Orthodox as true churches with valid bishops and sacraments. They hold that the Orthodox model lacks a universal principle of unity that the Petrine ministry provides. Many Catholic theologians note that Vatican II and recent popes have stressed the role of bishops and synods in ways that Orthodox Christians find encouraging.

Protestant

Protestants vary, since many have no bishops. Those with a conciliar or presbyterian form of government often recognize something familiar in the Orthodox stress on shared governance. Others note that, like Protestants, the Orthodox have faced divisions along national lines. All would test Orthodox teaching against Scripture.

Scholarly view

Historians note that conciliarity as a stated theory was developed carefully in modern Orthodox theology, partly in response to Western debates, and that its practice has varied, with strong involvement of emperors and states. Scholars debate how well the theory matches the history, in the early church and since.

Why it matters

The Orthodox way of ordering authority shows that there are more than two ways of answering the question of who decides. It also explains why Orthodox Christians treat issues such as the pope, the filioque and the role of councils as a single connected matter. Present events in the Orthodox world are best understood by those who know the theory they rest on.

Common misunderstandings

Knowledge check

Think it through

1. Can a church be both conciliar and have a first bishop? What conditions make this work?
2. How does reception differ from voting, and how long may it take?
3. What does a church lose and gain by tying itself to a national identity?
4. How should an outsider speak about current disputes in another tradition?

Independent assignment

A map of Orthodox authority

In your notebook, draw or list the levels of authority in the Orthodox Church: the local bishop, the synod, the patriarch or primate, the pan-Orthodox gathering and the ecumenical council. For each, write one sentence on its role and one on a point of tension. Then write 250 to 350 words on how the Orthodox model compares with the Catholic one, using at least one source from each tradition. Keep the work in your notebook.

Further study

• Timothy (Kallistos) Ware, The Orthodox Church Read the chapters on the church’s organization and the councils.
• Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, eds., The Seven Ecumenical Councils (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 2, vol. 14) Read the canons of Nicaea, Constantinople and Chalcedon on patriarchates and rank.
• Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church Read the chapter on tradition for the underlying theology.
• Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church) Compare the Catholic account of the college of bishops.
• Acts 15:6 The apostles and elders meet to consider the question.
• Matthew 18:20 Where two or three are gathered in my name.
• Ephesians 4:3 Keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.