Expressions of the Church's Synodality in the Life and Mission Of

Expressions of the Church’s Synodality in the Life and Mission of the Romanian Orthodox Church Sorin Șelaru

Abstract. — This paper outlines the way in which synodality is currently organized and lived within the Romanian Orthodox Church. To this end, the theological and spiritual foundations of the principle of synodality are highlighted first, as well as the embodiment of this principle, as an ecclesial reality at once permanent and dynamic, in different synodal structures of the Orthodox Church. The Romanian expressions of the synodality of the Orthodox Church are then presented with a view on the Statutes for the Organization and Functioning of the Romanian Ortho- dox Church, republished in 2020.

The topic of the present paper is clearly circumscribed: it addresses the Orthodox-Christian and Romanian understanding and experience of synodality in the Church. This is why my research taps primarily into Romanian sources, although it is not exclusively confined to them.1

1. For further elaboration on synodality in Orthodox ecclesiology, see: Nicolae Dura, Le régime de la synodalité selon la législation canonique conciliaire œcuménique du Ier millénaire (Bucarest: Ametist 92, 1999); Amphilochios Miltos, Collegialite et synodalite: Vers une comprehension commune entre catholiques et orthodoxes (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 2019); Maksim Vasiljević and Andrej Jeftic, eds., Synodality: A Forgotten and Mis- apprehended Vision: Reflections on the Holy and Great Council 2016 (Alhambra, CA: Sebastian Press, 2017); John Chryssavgis, ed., Primacy in the Church: The Office of Primate and the Authority of Councils, 2 vols. (Yonkers, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2016); Sorin Șelaru and Patriciu Vlaicu, eds., La primauté et les primats: Enjeux ecclésiologiques (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 2015); Jean-Claude Larchet, L’Église corps du Christ I: Nature et structure (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 2012); Metropolitan John of Pergamon, L’Église et ses institutions (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 2011); Georges Florovsky, Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox View, The Collected Works of Georges Florovsky 1 (Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing Co., 1972); Kallistos Ware, “Synodality and Primacy in the Orthodox Church,” International Journal of Orthodox Theology 10, no. 1 (2019): 19-40; Michel Stavrou, “Théologie et manifestations de la synodalité: Un défi permanent pour l’Église,” Recherches de Science Religieuse 106, no. 3 (2018): 403-422; Amphilochios Miltos, “Vers une théologie de la synodalité de l’Église: Une relecture orthodoxe,” Recherches de Science Religieuse 107, no. 2 (2019): THE CHURCH’S SYNODALITY IN THE ROMANIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 261

The Romanian Orthodox Church is the largest Orthodox Church in the European Union and also the Orthodox Church with the greatest number of adherents residing in Europe, outside the national borders. The Romanian Orthodox Church, titled “the Romanian Patriarchate,” is one of the nine Orthodox Patriarchates in existence today, as the majority Church in Romania where over 86% of the Romanians are self-declared Orthodox Christians. For the benefit of the millions of Orthodox Romanians living abroad, in European Union countries, it has outside Romania two metropolitan sees and one diocese, with 10 bishops and nearly 700 parishes. The first part of the present paper outlines the theological principles underlying synodal life in the Church, as well as their expression in the various synodal ecclesiastic structures, while the second part offers a brief description of the manner in which synodality is organized and experi- enced within the Romanian Orthodox Church today.

1. The Principle of Synodality in the Orthodox Church

1. Theological-spiritual Grounds and Contents A few years after the Second Vatican Council, theologian André de Hal- leux wrote in a study dedicated to the Eastern model of collegiality that, at the time, the generally shared opinion of Catholic theologians was the following: the Western Church could find a model for the reforms it envisaged in the old ecclesiological practice preserved unaltered by the Orthodox Church.2 Without further elaborating on potentially divisive historical considerations, the general feeling mentioned by the Louvain scholar actually points to a deep reality of Orthodox ecclesial life: communion through synodality. The Orthodox Church is a synodal Church. But what does this statement mean? In general, in their reflections on the principle of synodality in the Church, Orthodox theologians distinguish (without opposing or sepa- rating them) between the general synodality of the Church, tantamount to its catholicity (sobornost), and the constant practice of joint, shared responsibility for church life, exercised at all levels: local, regional and

327-335; John H. Erickson, “Common Comprehension of Christians concerning Auton- omy and Central Power in the Church in View of Orthodox Theology,” Kanon 4 (1979): 100-112. 2. André de Halleux, “Le modèle oriental de la collégialité,” Revue Théologique de Louvain 2 (1971): 76-88, 77. 262 SORIN ŞELARU universal.3 Both aspects are the living expression of the communional life of the Church. If the Church is, in the words of a great Romanian theologian, the “community of those who, by the power of Christ’s Spirit, advance towards resurrection and towards the ultimate fullness of perfect communion with Christ and with all those who believe in Him,”4 synodality is simply the way in which we walk along with God and our fellow people on the path to salvation. Its foundation as well as theological model is the Holy Trinity; more precisely, synodality is modelled on the manner in which the Three Divine Persons experience the communion of divine life, without separa- tion and without confusion.5 The term “synod” derives from the noun “ὁδός,” meaning way, path. “I am the Way (ἡ ὁδός), the Truth and the Life. No man cometh unto the Father, but by Me,” declares the Saviour in the Gospel according to John (14:6).6 He Himself – the Way, the Door, the Truth, the Life, came among us so that we may become, by grace, what He is by nature. This is why, at a time in church history when all Christians titled each other saints, Ignatius of Antioch assured the Christians of Ephesus that they were σύνοδοι / companions on the journey as they all were God-bearers (theophoroi), temple-bearers (naophoroi), Christ-bearers (christophoroi), and bearers of holiness (hagiophoroi).7 Church life partakes of the life of God, One and Trinitarian, and of the Mystery of unity and diversity. And it is in the Church that the divine life is communicated to human beings (1 John 1:3-4). The mission of the Church lies in the perpetual actualization of the communion between God and the human person, manifest once and for all in the Person of the Incarnate Word.8 It brings people together in the love of

3. Patriarch Daniel of the Romanian Orthodox Church, “La participation des baptisés au processus préconciliaire,” in La Joie de la Fidelité (Paris: Cerf/Istina, 2009), 299-317. The present paper elaborates on this distinction emphasized by Patriarch Daniel. 4. Dumitru Stăniloae, Prière de Jésus et expérience du Saint-Esprit (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1981), 118. 5. The synodal dimension of church life “reflects the Trinitarian mystery and finds therein its ultimate foundation.” Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, “Ecclesio- logical and Canonical Consequences of the Sacramental Nature of the Church. Ecclesial Communion, Conciliarity and Authority, Ravenna 2007, 5,” Greek Orthodox Theological Review 52, nos. 1-4 (2007): 215-232, 217. 6. This and other biblical quotations are given in the translation of the KJV. 7. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians 9.2, in Ignace d’Antioche, Polycarpe de Smyrne, Lettres. Martyre du Polycarpe, ed. Pierre Thomas Camelot, Sources Chrétiennes 10 (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 1958), 78-79. 8. The holy fathers of the Church have employed the term ‘synod’ to designate the union of the divine and the human nature in the hypostasis of the Saviour. THE CHURCH’S SYNODALITY IN THE ROMANIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 263 the Trinitarian God, as it creates among the faithful the same unity as the intra-trinitarian one.9 Its identity is truly unique, unparalleled by anything else in this world: it is unity gained by partaking of Christ, God and Man, One and the Same, by common participation in the “unity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.”10 The Church is the Body of Christ and Temple of the Holy Spirit, wherein communion with Christ in the Holy Spirit transforms people into receptacles of the Kingdom of God, even in this world. And the Church’s work is to set man on the path of communion with God – a merciful, loving-kind God. Ecclesial communion, manifest in synodality, is thus rooted in the Trinitarian perichoresis, in God’s self-offering to the world, and in the personal human life, created in the image of the Uni-Trinitarian God. The synodality is the felicitous expression of the ecclesial virtues of faith confession, service, ministry, solidarity, responsibility, self-giving and self- sacrifice for the sake of the community. It is in itself a special kind of ministry, as it serves ecclesial unity and communion. In light of communion ecclesiology, church synodality is perceived as unity in freedom and responsibility, as it is not mere social cohesion, but unity in God which has its primary source in the Christian baptism. Synodality is in agreement with the Christian manner of living in the Church, which is communional, not individual existence. According to this communional view of the Church, synodality is the specific modus vivendi and operandi11 of the Church – the People of God, as a state of permanent communion of the distinct human persons, united without confusion with each other and in relation with the distinct Persons of the Holy Trinity. Due to the synodal dimension of the Church, the entire Church may be considered as a great Synod or an ongoing, perpetual synod12 in which every member’s contribution is both individual work and joint work. The Holy Evangelist Luke pointed out that the Holy Spirit did not descend onto each of the apostles individually, but upon all the apostles who had gathered in anticipation of the fulfilment of “the promise of

9. See Maximus the Confessor, Mystagogia 1, in Maximi Confessoris opera omnia, ed. François Combefis et Jacques Paul Migne, Patrologia Graeca 91 (Paris: Migne, 1865), col. 668. 10. Cyprian of Carthage, De Dominica Oratione 23, in Sancti Thascii Caecilii Cypriani Episcopi Carthaginensis et Martyris opera omnia, ed. Jacques Paul Migne, Patro- logia Latina 4 (Paris: Migne, 1844), col. 536. 11. International Theological Commission, Synodality in the Life and Mission of the Church, March 2, 2018, no. 6; http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_20180302_sinodalita_en.html (accessed June 10, 2020). 12. Dumitru Stăniloae, Teologia dogmatică ortodoxă, vol. 2 (Bucuresti: Editura Institutului Biblic si de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Romane, 1997), 186. 264 SORIN ŞELARU the Father” and “were all together in one place” (Acts 2:1). Such was the pledge of the Saviour: “Where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in their midst” (Matt 18:20). The event of the Pente- cost is perceived by the collective mind of the Church as an expression of church synodality, as the emergence of a new, God-inspired common way of thinking which transcends divisive divergences. The consequences of such an ecclesial approach are obvious. The Church is a sacramental organism, and its catholicity and synodality are derived from the unity of God – the eternal communion of love among equal, consubstantial (coessential) Persons who mutually embrace and offer themselves up to each other, and to the world. The Holy Trinity is present in church life, and is communicated to people in the holy mys- teries (sacraments), thus constituting the Church and imparting to it a Trinitarian and Eucharistic character, so that it may truly become “imago Trinitatis.”13 Thus salvation itself depends on the act of communion with God and with fellow people. And this is also why the ecclesial structures must truly be expressions of an ecclesiology of communion. Because none of them separately are infallible, but only the Church as a whole is. The Trinitarian model of divine perichoresis is applied in ecclesiology as long as the various ministries within the Church are subsumed to synodality, rather than be placed above it. Any other logic, subordinating synodality to any principle that does not abide by the ‘law of communion’ is alien to the Eucharistic, Trinitarian sobornost. The Munich common statement of the Joint Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the Roman-Catholic Church insists on this tenet, by declaring: This is why the Church finds its model, its origin and its purpose in the mystery of God, one in three Persons. Further still, the Eucharist thus understood in the light of the Trinitarian mystery is the criterion for functioning of the life of the Church as a whole. The institutional elements should be nothing but a visible reflection of the reality of the mystery.14

13. Dumitru Stăniloae, “Trinitarian Relations and the Life of the Church,” in id., Theology and the Church, trans. by Robert Barringer, foreword by John Meyendorff (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1980), 11-44. 14. “The Mystery of the Church and of the Eucharist in the Light of the Mystery of the Holy Trinity,” Munich 1982, II, 1, in Growth in Agreement II: Reports and Agreed Statements of Ecumenical Conversations on a World Level 1982-1998, ed. Jeffrey Gros, Harding Meyer, and William G. Rusch (Geneva: World Council of Churches Publica- tions, 2000), 655. THE CHURCH’S SYNODALITY IN THE ROMANIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 265

Having its model, its origin and its purpose in the Mystery of the Triune God, church synodality is sacramental or Eucharistic. Gathering in the Church in order to celebrate the Eucharist is the primary manifestation of synodality in Orthodoxy. The Church herself is eucharistic, and the Eucharistic synaxis is the archetype and the foundation of any assembly in the Church. In this context, the bishop holds a particular office, as he is a Eucharistic person and a guarantor of the authenticity of the Eucharist. The convening of the Church in councils expresses very clearly this direct relation with the Eucharist: in general, councils and synods would begin and conclude with a Eucharistic celebration, and many of them had to decide on the matter of resuming Eucharistic communion, if it had been interrupted, or on the matter of denying communion to those holding heretic views. Therefore, synodality should be understood in this sacramental key in which Eucharistic ecclesiology, never separated from baptismal ecclesiology, offers the basis for assuming and living the ecclesial communion. An Orthodox theologian stated that the Church herself cannot be ‘more or less’ one, or ‘more or less’ catholic.15 Accordingly, it cannot be ‘more or less’ synodal, either. It is either synodal, or not at all. It is the role of the synodal structures of the Church to give an accurate historical expression, and to preserve and convey its sacred unity and catholicity. Certainly, there are major risks of which ecclesial structures – these “earthen vessels” (2 Cor 4:7) carrying God’s authority, must be aware in order to make God’s life fully transparent to the world. They remain faithful to the evangelical spirit inasmuch as they are able to convey and express Trinitarian love and life; any opacity hinders freedom in communion, is an obstacle raised by man’s infidelity to God. Their purpose is to express, in the spirit of Trinitarian and Eucharistic communion, authority in synodality, as structures designed to serve and ensure communion, because saintliness and perfection cannot exist without communion.

2. The Synodal Organization of the Church As an ecclesial reality at once permanent and dynamic, synodality has been expressed in various ways and forms throughout church history: from the most limited in scope – at the level of the smallest local ecclesial

15. John Meyendorff, Catholicity and the Church (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1983), 10. 266 SORIN ŞELARU community or congregation, to the most comprehensive one – at the level of the entire Church, and from the earliest forms to contemporary ones existing in the Orthodox Church. In general, the synodal structures developed by the Church can be classified according to several criteria16: a) according to their membership, they may be episcopal assemblies or mixed assemblies of clergy and laity; b) according to their authority, they can be decisional (decision-making) or consultative assemblies; c) according to jurisdiction and attendance, there can be local synods, regional synods, and synods of the entire Orthodox Church. The smallest synod form in the Orthodox Church is the Parochial Assembly, which passes decisions concerning the local community of faithful, and the largest type of synod is the Ecumenical Council, of the entire Church. In Orthodox ecclesiology, the local Church is the diocese or eparchy headed by a bishop. To define the organization of the church at regional level, we speak of the ‘metropolitan’ or ‘patriarchate’ system, which includes several dioceses.17 The terminology in use also includes autonomous or autocephalous churches, which can be named archdioceses, metropoles/metropolitan sees or patriarchates, but very rarely do Orthodox theologians employ the phrase ‘regional Church’; d) according to the frequency of convening, the synods and the councils may be standing bodies or occasional /extraordinary gath- erings. The standing bodies are: permanent synods and periodical synods. According to the canonical tradition of the Orthodox Church, regional synods are to convene at least twice a year (Apostolic Canon 37, Canon 5 of the First Ecumenical Council, Canon 19 of the Fourth Ecumenical Council). Apostolic Canon 37 reads: “Let there be a meeting of the bishops twice a year, and let them examine amongst themselves the decrees concerning religion and settle the ecclesiastical controversies which may have occurred. One meeting to be held in the fourth week of Pentecost [i.e., the fourth week after Easter], and the other on the 12th day of the month Hyperberetaeus [i.e., October].”18 Later, due to the times’ hard- ships, it was accepted that if two meetings per year were not possible, then such synods, or meetings, were to take place at least once annually (Canon 8 of the Quinisext Council, Canon 6 of the Seventh Ecumenical Council).

16. Irimie Marga, “Sinod,” in Dicționar de Teologie Ortodoxă, ed. Ștefan Buchiu and Ioan Tulcan (Bucharest: Basilica, 2018), 853. 17. Some Orthodox theologians designate also an autocephalous Church as a local Church. 18. Henry R. Percival, “The Apostolic Canons,” in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, vol. 14, ed. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library), 1153. THE CHURCH’S SYNODALITY IN THE ROMANIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 267

However, the Church may assemble in synods or councils whenever necessary. In this case, such meetings are termed extraordinary synods or councils. All seven ecumenical councils acknowledged by the Orthodox Church are extraordinary manifestations of the constitutive synodality of the Church. As exceptional responses to moments of crisis in the Church history, the ecumenical councils convened in order to settle major conflicts around the understanding or interpretation of the common tenets of the Christian faith which caused the division of the Church. By exercising synodality, the bishops attending the ecumenical councils defended, confessed and expressed in a living and creative manner the identity of the faith, the unity of the Body of Christ.19 The Holy Fathers... dealt with heresies and current problems by debate in common, since it was established as certain that when the disputed question is set out by each side in communal discussions, the light of truth drives out the shadows of lying. The truth cannot be made clear in any other way when there are debates about questions of faith, since everyone requires the assistance of his neighbour.20 The above quotation is, according to Tanner, “the most beautiful statement”21 issued by an ecumenical council on the need to have an open, collective debate concerning matters of interest for the entire Church, and on the importance of joint decisions, made by those who hold pastoral authority and responsibility in the Church. This declaration of the bishops who assembled in the Council of Constantinople in 553 a.d. stresses the importance of exercising synodality with a view to asserting, defending and expressing correctly the truth of the faith in order to reject heretical distor- tions. Synodality is based on, and rooted in the tradition of the holy fathers, “who gathered at intervals in the four holy councils, followed the examples of Antiquity,”22 and it actually goes back to the first time in an official document of the ecumenical Church, to the apostolic synod of Jerusalem (Acts 15). There, as state the fathers of the Fifth Ecumenical Council, the apostles “unanimously reached the conclusion which they wrote to the gentiles: It has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us…” Firstly “to the Holy Spirit (τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι),” because the Spirit of God is “the Spirit of Truth,” who “guides into all Truth” (cf. John 16:13). He is the true locus, or vehicle, or carrier of the Tradition of the Truth,

19. Sorin Şelaru, Viorel Coman, and George Gherga, eds., Hotărârile dogmatice ale celor şapte Sinoade Ecumenice (Bucureşti: Basilica, 2018), 11. 20. Norman Tanner, ed., Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, vol. I: Nicaea I to Lateran V (London: Sheed & Ward, 1990), 108. 21. Norman Tanner, Conciles et synodes (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 2000), 46. 22. Tanner, Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils I, 108. 268 SORIN ŞELARU as state the fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council: “stepping out as though on the royal highway, following as we are the God-spoken teaching of our holy fathers and the tradition of the catholic church – for we recognize that this tradition comes from the Holy Spirit who dwells in her – we decree with full precision and care that...”23 By participating in the Tradition, which is more than mere permanence or continuity of historical memory, as Father Andrei Scrima puts it,24 a human being becomes contemporaneous with the original moment of the revelation, when God communicates Himself to humanity: “He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth Me; and he that receiveth Me receiveth Him that sent Me” (John 13:20). “...And to us... (καὶ ἡμῖν)” – because in faith, human beings opening themselves to God become contemporaneous with God. They tap into the living tradition of a community of faith which imparts life (ζωή); not an abstract notion, but a living truth: “Sanctify them through Thy truth; Thy word is truth” (John 17:17); “He that hearth My word, and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life” (John 5:24). Their allegiance to the Way, Truth and Life (John 14:6), aligns the fathers of the ecumenical councils with the faith of the apostles. By defending and elaborating on the revealed truth of the faith, the council fathers continue the work of the apostles and express the living Tradition of the Church, centered around Christ and pursuing the salvation and sanctification of the human being. This is exemplified by the dogmatic definition issued at Chalcedon, which states emphatically: “following the saintly fathers, we all with one voice teach the confession...,” “ὁμολογεῖν... συμφώνως ἅπαντες ἐκδιδάσκο- μεν,” as do the texts of the following councils. These definitions-professions of the faith released by the ecumenical councils are expressions of the direct experience of the truth, confessions of the entire Church community and of the entire world partaking intimately of the truth. From the Orthodox standpoint regarding the various ministries in the Church, the pastoral-sanctifying ministry distinguishes episcopal synodality from general synodality, or the catholicity of the Church, but always considers them to be complementary, as the former is simply the organic reflection of the latter. Episcopal synodality expresses both the principle of communion, and the transcendent origin of the sanctifying acts in the Church.25 Therefore, episcopal synodality is an indispensable

23. Tanner, Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils I, 135. 24. Andrei Scrima, Funcția critică a credinței (Bucuresti: Humanitas, 2011), 139. 25. Dumitru Stăniloae, “Temeiurile teologice ale ierarhiei şi sinodalităţii,” Studii Teologice 22, nos. 3-4 (1970): 165-178. THE CHURCH’S SYNODALITY IN THE ROMANIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 269 prerequisite for Church sobornost, because through it, “the catholicity of the local Church is guaranteed and protected.”26 Eucharistic ecclesiology, centered around the local Church and its sacramental foundation, reveals on the one hand, the central role played by a bishop in his eparchy, and on the other hand the notable responsibility of his mission to ensure his Church’s communion with the other churches, in the unity of the Church worldwide. From the Orthodox standpoint, the synodality of episcopacy manifests the unity and communion of local churches, because the bishop present in a synod embod- ies, or stands for, or represents his local Church, as an expression of the solidarity of all members in the One Body of Christ. At the same time, the synodality of episcopacy has divine origins, since it represents the communion of those who have been invested by Christ with a special responsibility in the Church. Thus, the synodality of episcopacy is both top-down and bottom-up, on the one hand referring to the transcend- ence of the sanctifying work in the Church, and on the other hand to the perfect catholicity of the local Church, manifest in the communion of churches. The two realities are mutually inclusive and contain each other: the bishop is in the Church, and the Church is in the bishop. This is why Orthodox theologians avoid referring to episcopal synodality merely in terms of collegiality, and when they do, they see the bishops’ collegiality as a result of synodality. The bishops assembled in a synod or council represent their respective communities in the unity and communion of the entire Church, and to an extent carry them in themselves. Therefore, in order to comprehend Orthodox synodality, one must first understand the Orthodox ecclesial structure and organization, that is, the way in which the various local and autocephalous churches exist and are interrelated within the Orthodox Church. This brings us to what Orthodox canon law theologians term the principle of ecclesial autonomy, as characteristic to the organization and functioning of the Orthodox ecumenical communion.27 The bishop’s autonomy is tantamount to the autonomy of the community he shepherds, and synodality is the expression of the communion of the various local churches. In accordance with the Trinitarian and Eucharistic model, Orthodox theologians regard the Orthodox Church as a communion of sister churches, open to each other, equal and consubstantial, that is, churches

26. Metropolitan John of Pergamon, L’Église et ses institutions (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 2011), 220. 27. Georgică Grigoriţă, L’autonomie ecclésiastique selon la legislation canonique actuelle de l’Église orthodoxe et de l’Église catholique: Étude canonique comparative (Rome: Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 2011). 270 SORIN ŞELARU which individually and all together possess catholicity as fullness of the truth of the faith, of life and of sacramental priesthood. This Trinitarian and Eucharistic ecclesiological stance has direct consequences on the perspective on the relationship between the local and the universal Church. Just as each Person of the Holy Trinity does not possess only a part of the Godhead, but the full Godhead, or just as every Eucharist contains not only a particle of Christ’s Body, but the full Body of Christ, similarly each local Church is not simply a part of the whole Church, but the full manifestation of the Church in a particular place. The relationship between the local Church and the Church as a whole is perichoretic, mutually inclusive, precluding any chronological or ontological prece- dence of one over the other, because they interpenetrate, they are inter- twined and contain, reflect and manifest each other. At the same time, the full catholicity of every local Church accounts for the ontological equality of the various local churches in communion, their fellowship. Even though a particular Church may hold a particular responsibility, it is no more or less a Church than any of the others. The catholicity of the local Church, based on the unity of faith, on the full presence of Christ in every Eucharistic community, and on the bishop as a guarantor of the authenticity of the Eucharist and of the synodality of the Church, makes it impossible to adhere to an ecclesiology of primacy, to an ecclesiology which posits that one Church has power or authority over another. On the contrary, it postulates the fundamental, essential equality of all bishops. From the Orthodox standpoint, synodality and primacy are complementary and interdependent, only if primacy exists within church synodality, and not the other way around. The relationship between the first among the bishops (the protos) and the other bishops in a synod is clearly defined by the “golden rule” of Orthodox synodality, namely by Apostolic Canon 34, which reads as follows: It behoves the Bishops of every nation to know the one among them who is the premier (πρῶτον) or chief, and to recognise him as their head (κεφαλήν), and to refrain from doing anything superfluous without his advice and approval: but, instead, each of them should do only whatever is necessitated by his own parish and by the ter- ritories under him. But let not even such a one do anything without the advice and consent and approval of all. For thus will there be concord (ὁμόνοια), and God will be glorified through the Lord in the Holy Spirit: the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.28

28. Nicodemos of the Holy Mountain, The Rudder (Pedalion) of the Metaphorical Ship of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of the Orthodox Christians, Explained by Apapius and Nicodemos, transl. by D. Cummings (Chicago, IL: Orthodox Christian Educational Society, 1957), 50. THE CHURCH’S SYNODALITY IN THE ROMANIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 271

In addition to the principle of the distinction between the protos (first among bishops) and the other bishops, this canon also postulates the principle of mutuality, or reciprocity, in synodality: the bishops cannot do anything without the protos, while the protos cannot do anything without the other bishops, either. The protos is the head of the synod by presiding it in the spirit of love and concord, and his position is indispensable to the smooth functioning of the assembly. To the Orthodox, his authority as protos-bishop is restricted, both with regard to convening the synod (which he cannot do without the agreement of the other bishops), and with regard to the decisions passed by the synod, where his vote carries no more weight than the votes of the other bishops.29 This is why the expression of the supreme unity and authority of an autocephalous Church is not the protos himself, but the synod – that is, the communion of bishops, as manifestation of the communion of churches.30 This is also why the synod’s decisions come into effect only when they are received by the entire Church, be it an entire autocephalous Church, or the ecumenical Orthodoxy. One last distinction is worth mentioning here: from the Orthodox standpoint, regarding the various organizational levels of the Church as described by the Ravenna Document of the Joint International Commis- sion for Theological Dialogue (2007), on the local, regional and universal levels, the authority of a bishop over his eparchy is sacramental, pastoral and magisterial respectively. This authority is divine and communitarian, that is, imparted by Christ through the Church (synodality in time, as apostolic succession, and synodality in space – the communion of bishops upon ordination). At the regional level, the authority of the head of a metropolis or of an autonomous or autocephalous church, stems from his very election by the synod of bishops. In this sense, Apostolic Canon 34 mentioned above speaks of “knowing the premier (protos)” among the bishops and ‘recognizing him’ by all. Thus, authority at regional level derives from the synodality of bishops, because the protos’ authority ema- nates from the synod of bishops having elected him. At the level of the entire Orthodox Church, however, the head/protos is not elected by a pan-Orthodox or ecumenical council. Thus, his authority is not derived from the synodality of the bishops, manifesting the communion of churches, but from the canonical tradition of the Church.31

29. Larchet, L’Église corps du Christ I, 131. 30. Patriarch Daniel, La Joie de la Fidélité, 231. 31. “Position of the Moscow Patriarchate on the Problem of Primacy in the Uni- versal Church,” no. 2, in Primacy in the Church: The Office of Primate and the Authority of Councils: Historical and Theological Perspectives, ed. John Chryssavgis (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2016), 427-430. 272 SORIN ŞELARU

2. Synodality in the Romanian Orthodox Church (ROC)

The fundamental document that organizes the life of the ROC today is the Statutes for the Organization and Functioning of the Romanian Ortho- dox Church of 2007, amended in 2019 and republished in 2020.32 The Statutes include a Preamble and Final Stipulations, and four main parts: (1) Organization, (2) On the Clergy, (3) Church Institutions with Missionary Purpose, (4) Various Stipulations in 204 articles.33 Among others, the Statutes define and elaborate on the Romanian expressions of the synodality of the Orthodox Church. The Statutes, as explains His Beatitude Daniel, the current Patriarch of Romania, are based on a number of major underlying general principles: 1. The pan-Orthodox (universal) unity of the faith and national autocephaly; 2. The synodal hierarchical unity and eparchial autonomy; 3. Primacy coordination (Patriarch and Metropolitan) and common synodal responsibility of the bishops (national level – the Holy Synod, and regional level – the Metropolitan Synod); 4. Cooperation of hierarchs with the clergy and the laity – distinct responsibilities, but common work; 5. Church-State relationships: autonomy from the State and cooperation with the State aimed to preserve and foster the values of the Orthodox faith, and to ensure the benefit of society.34 Except for the last principle, which addresses the position of the Church in relation to the State, all the other principles evince the internal synodality of the Church, as the ecclesial balance that needs to exist between unity and distinction, and as communion fostered at all levels of ecclesial life. The Statutes begin by situating the Romanian Orthodox Church within the Church as a whole. The first article of the Statutes reads: “The Romanian Orthodox Church is the community of the Ortho- dox Christians, clergy, monks and lay, canonically constituted in parishes and monasteries in the eparchies of the Romanian Patriarchate inside and outside the Romanian borders, which confess God in the Holy Trinity, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, based on the Holy Scripture, liturgical services and canonical order.” If the qualifier Romanian and the mention

32. Republished in Monitorul Oficial al României [Official Gazette of Romania], Part I, no. 97, February 10, 2020. 33. For a concise presentation of the ROC Statutes, see: Grigoriţă, L’autonomie ecclésiastique, 145-164 and Patriciu Vlaicu, Le Statut de l’Église orthodoxe en Roumanie post-communiste (1989-2007) (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2013), 81-102. 34. “Libertate şi responsabilitate pentru comuniune în Biserică,” Prefaţă la noul Statut al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române/Preface for the new Statutes of the Romanian Orthodox Church (Bucureşti: Editura Institutului Biblic si de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Romane, 2008), 6-7. THE CHURCH’S SYNODALITY IN THE ROMANIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 273 of Romania are removed from the text, then it provides a definition of the Orthodox Church at large, that is, the community of those who confess and share the identity of dogmatic, sacramental and canonical life. The second article of the Statutes stresses both the communion in the Una Sancta: the Romanian Orthodox Church, “of apostolic origin, is and remains in communion and dogmatic, liturgical and canonical unity with the universal Orthodox Church” (art. 2.1); and the distinct identity of the ROC within the unity of Orthodoxy: The Romanian Orthodox Church “is autocephalous and unitary in her organisation and pastoral, missionary and administrative work” (art. 2.2). An autocephalous Church is a Church which is self-governing. The Orthodoxy is today a communion of autocephalous sister churches, equal and independent from each other in matters of ecclesial administration, but united in the same faith, sharing in the same sacramental life, and having the same structure and canonical discipline.35 There is an honorary ranking among these churches, which however does not affect their fundamental equality. They are independent but, at the same time, interdependent. According to its Statutes, the Romanian Orthodox Church is an autocephalous Church organized as a Patriarchate, titled: “the Romanian Patriarchate” and comprises eparchies (archdioceses or dioceses) grouped in metropolitan sees, as well as other units inside and outside the Roma- nian borders (art. 6). Article 3 states that the Romanian Orthodox Church (1) has a synodal hierarchic leadership, according to the teaching and canons of the Orthodox Church and to her historical tradition, and (2) is admin- istrated autonomously through her own representative bodies, made up of clergy and lay members. We note that the first point of this article already places the synodal-hierarchical organization of the ROC within the ecumenical Orthodox Tradition, as a communional structure confer- ring its internal unity. The second point indicates the particularity of Romanian Orthodoxy with regard to its manner of structuring synodality, stressing and acknowledging the ‘organic’ role played by laypeople in the life of the Church. Admittedly, it is true that on the one hand the canonical principle of collaboration between clergy and laity has existed since the very beginnings of the synodal organization of the Church. On the other hand, the Romanian expression of church synodality is also a legacy perpetuated by the entire Romanian Patriarchate in its first Statutes for functioning (1925), since the 1868 Organic Statutes of the Orthodox Church in Transylvania drafted by Metropolitan Andrei Șaguna (1808-

35. Patriarch Daniel, La Joie de la Fidélité, 229. 274 SORIN ŞELARU

1873).36 This document instituted joint synods, made up of one third clergy members and two thirds laypersons, at all levels of authority for all important decisions in church life. Also, the fact that today, at every level of the organization of church life within the Romanian Patriar- chate, there is at least one deliberative and one executive synodal body is due to the same legacy of Metropolitan Șaguna. At parish level, the Parochial Assembly is the deliberative body. It is made up of the faithful of the parish over the age of majority (art. 54), with various tasks, from drafting strategies, writing reports, and budget- ing to monitoring the way in which measures are implemented and managed. The executive body of the Parochial Assembly is the Parochial Council. Council members are elected for a 4-year tenure from among the members of the Parochial Assembly (7, 9 or 12 members – depend- ing on the size of the parish) (art. 59). In addition to these two synodal bodies at parish level, there is also the Parochial Committee, reporting to the Council, directly overseeing the parish activities, and working along five directions: social, missionary, cultural, youth activities and administrative activities, each member having specific tasks (art. 66-67). The parish priest is the president of these three parochial bodies. The synodal organization of an eparchy, which in the Romanian Orthodox Church may be an archdiocese or a diocese, includes the Epar- chial Assembly as deliberative body, the Eparchial Council and the Standing Eparchial Council as executive bodies. The Eparchial Assembly is a deliberative body for all administrative, cultural, social-philanthropic, economic and patrimonial activities of the eparchy, and includes 30 elected members – one third of them clergy members, and two thirds laypersons (10 clergymen and 20 laypersons), with a 4-year tenure (art. 90-91). The lay members of the Eparchial Assembly are elected from among the delegates of Parochial Councils, and its clergy members are elected from among all the priests and deacons in office, constituted in priestly electoral colleges, on constituencies. The executive body of the Eparchial Assembly is the Eparchial Council made up of 9 members (3 clergymen and 6 laypersons), elected for a 4-year tenure by the Eparchial Assembly, from among its members (art. 95-96). Between the meetings of the Eparchial Council functions the Standing Eparchial Council, made up of the administrative staff of the eparchy (art. 99-100). The eparchial bishop is president of the Eparchial Assembly, Council and Standing Council.

36. See George Grigorita, “Le concile de Moscou de 1917-1918 et l’organisation de l’Église orthodoxe roumaine après la Première Guerre mondiale: influences occiden- tales et orientales,” Contacts 263 (2018): 416-427. THE CHURCH’S SYNODALITY IN THE ROMANIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 275

In the spirit of Apostolic Canon 34 quoted above, dioceses and archdioceses are grouped into metropolitan sees (metropoles), headed by a metropolitan. Major cities are the residences of the metropolitans of the respective regions. There is a single metropolitan whose authority extends over a particular region. He is the president of the Metropolitan Synod, which oversees the common activities of the eparchies within the metro polis, and is made up of all the hierarchs of the respective region (art. 110-113). This is why within the entire territory of Romania there are today only 6 metropolitan sees (a metropolis can encompass a territory the size of Belgium), plus 4 others outside Romanian borders. In other churches, however, such as the Church of Greece, all bishops have the rank of metropolitan, even assistant bishops (vicar bishops, or auxiliary bishops). It is also worth noting that a region’s metropolitan convenes and chairs the Metropolitan Synod, and he also chairs the meeting of the Holy Synod (that is, the Great Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church) for the election of his suffragan archbishops and bishops (art. 114,4). At the central level of organization of the Romanian Orthodox Church, there are deliberative, executive, juridical and administrative bodies. There are three deliberative bodies: 1) the Holy Synod, 2) the Standing Synod, 3) the Church National Assembly; and three executive bodies: 1) the Patriarch of Romania, 2) the Church National Council, 3) the Standing Church National Council. The most important decisions concerning church life are made by the Holy Synod of the ROC, as the highest authority of the Romanian Orthodox Church in all its fields of activity (art. 11). It comprises all the hierarchs in office, and its president is the Patriarch. In keeping with the canonical tradition, the Holy Synod of the ROC meets every year in at least two working sessions, in spring and autumn, and in extraordinary meetings whenever necessary. To study and formulate the issues to be submitted for deliberation, the Holy Synod has four commissions: a) the Pastoral, Monastic and Social Commission; b) the Theological, Liturgical and Didactic Commission; c) the Canonical, Juridical and Disciplinary Commission; d) the Commission for External Communi- ties, Inter-Orthodox and Inter-Religious Relations. Every commission is presided by a metropolitan (art. 15). It is worth noting that, although some titles, names or designations are employed across the entire Orthodox world, their content may vary from one autocephalous Church to the next. For instance, in some autocephalous Orthodox Churches,37 the designation ‘Holy Synod’ actually

37. Such as the Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Patriarchate of Moscow. 276 SORIN ŞELARU indicates the Standing Synod, which comprises a limited number of hierarchs grouped around the Patriarch, while the Bishops’ Assembly is actually the synod comprising all bishops of the respective autocephalous Church. In such cases, most decisions, including the election of new bishops, are made by these Standing Synods and not by the assembly of all bishops. In the case of the Romanian Orthodox Church, however, such decisions are exclusively made by the Holy Synod which comprises all hierarchs, vicar or auxiliary bishops included. Moreover, the vote of vicar bishops (assistant bishops or auxiliary bishops) carries the same weight as the vote of eparchy bishops, of metropolitans, and even of the Patriarch for the decisions passed by the Synod, because each hierarch has only one vote in the Holy Synod. The Romanian Orthodox Church also has a Standing Synod, which operates between the meetings of the Holy Synod, in general in order to settle urgent matters. The Standing Synod comprises the Patriarch of Romania and all metropolitans in office, plus three more bishops (one archbishop and two bishops) appointed annually by the Holy Synod (art. 17-18). The central deliberative body of the Romanian Orthodox Church in all administrative, social, cultural, economic and patrimonial matters is the Church National Assembly. It comprises three representatives of every eparchy (one clergyman and two laypersons), each with a 4-year tenure (art. 19-20). It meets once a year in a working session, and at additional times when there is need. The Church National Council is a central executive body of the Holy Synod and of the Church National Assembly. It meets at least twice a year or any time it is necessary, and comprises 12 members of the Church National Assembly (one clergy and one layperson representing each metropolitan see of Romania), with a 4-year tenure (art. 28-29). During the period between its meetings, the Standing Committee of the Church National Council operates on behalf of the Church National Council (art. 31). It is headed by the Patriarch of Romania, who is the protos among the hierarchs of the Romanian Orthodox Church, and the president of all central deliberative and executive bodies of the Church (art. 24).

3. Conclusion

There certainly are many other aspects worth mentioning here, with regard to the understanding and experience of ecclesial synodality within the Romanian Orthodox Church, but they are beyond the scope of the THE CHURCH’S SYNODALITY IN THE ROMANIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 277 present paper. To conclude, it should be noted however that, in the spirit of the canonical tradition of the ecumenical Orthodox Church, the hierarchs of the Romanian Orthodox Church are not appointed, but elected. The manner of hierarchs’ election expresses the Romanian perception of church synodality, which presupposes consultations and co-responsibility at all levels of church life organization. For instance, for the election of an eparchial bishop, the first to be consulted is the Met- ropolitan Synod; then the Metropolitan Synod consults with the Eparchial Assembly, and a third consultation takes place at the level of the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church (art. 130). More precisely, the Metropolitan Synod puts forward, after open consultation followed by secret consulting vote, a list of two candidates; the proposal is then subject to open consultation with the Eparchial Assembly, which may confirm this list or may add another candidate. At the level of the Holy Synod, if this is deemed necessary, one more candidate may be added to the list. Then the Holy Synod, having consulted the clergy and lay members of the Church bodies, elects the bishop by secret ballot (art. 126), out of maximum four candidates. The candidate who obtains half plus one of the total number of valid votes becomes the elected eparchial bishop. In conclusion, the experience of synodality within the Romanian Orthodox Church evinces both the steadiness and fidelity of communion in the unity of the entire Orthodoxy, and the specifically Romanian understanding of ecclesial communion. Hierarchical synodality is perceived as cooperation or collaboration of those who are essentially equal, and who acknowledge their protos according to the model of Trinitarian communion. At the same time, the synodal structures operating at all levels of church life provide the framework for cooperation between clergy and laity in the Church, and for the active participation of all church members in the life and mission of the Church, following the model of Eucharistic communion.

Sorin Șelaru is a Romanian Orthodox priest, the Director of the Representation Office of the Romanian Patriarchate to the EU in Brussels (Belgium) and Profes- sor of Systematic Theology at the Faculty of Orthodox Theology in Bucharest (Romania). He earned his PhD in theology from the University of Strasbourg (France). His favourite themes of theological research are ecclesiology, ecumen- ism, and anthropology. Address: Strada Sfânta Ecaterina 2-4, Bucharest 040155, Romania. Email: [email protected].