Everyone, Let Us Prepare the Council Together
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FROM THE ARCHIVES Everyone, Let us Prepare the Council Together Olivier Clément Translated by Gregory Tucker Translator’s Note “Tous, préparons ensemble le Concile” appeared first in Contacts 76.4 (1971) and was reprinted in the first volume of Synodika (1976), the official publication of the Secretariat for the Preparation of the Holy and Great Council of the Or- thodox Church. The latter publication is available online (http://www.aposto- 1 Aristoklēs Mat- liki-diakonia.gr/gr_main/dialogos/SYNODHIKA_1.pdf) but is corrupt; several thaiou Spyrou clauses have been transposed between different sections of the paper, leaving (1886–1973) was incomplete and incomprehensible sentences. The present translation has been Patriarch of Constan- made from the text in Contacts. At points, the essay reads more like the tran- tinople from 1948 to 1972. His meeting script of a speech than a polished publication; the translator has attempted to with Pope Paul VI reflect this. Furthermore, Clément sometimes takes on, without notification, the in Jerusalem in 1964 voice of those he is criticizing. It is necessary for the reader to infer the tone of led to the rescinding sarcasm and irony in what he writes. All notes are added by the translator. of the excommunica- tions of 1054, a sym- bolic step towards Orthodox-Catholic I. A New Situation: Ebb and Tensions sions concerning the organization reunification. His of the Diaspora (American auto- efforts were opposed In the Orthodox Church, the unify- cephaly) and ecumenical relations by anti-ecumenists, including Metropol- ing dynamism sparked by Athenag- (openness, according to oikonomia, itan Philaret (Vozne- oras I reached its peak at the Cham- and under certain conditions, to Eu- sensky) of ROCOR. bésy conference in June 1968.1 Since charistic communion with Roman then, we have witnessed the ebb of Catholics).2 Here is not the place to 2 Oikonomia is a term this dynamism and the reappear- judge the intrinsic value of these used to describe the application of ance—indeed, the aggravation—of actions. But it must be recognized canons according to fault lines which he had temporarily that they showed a certain indiffer- circumstances with covered or sought to heal. Two fault ence toward the preconciliar situa- a view to effecting a lines must be mentioned especially: tion in which the Church has found specific end result, itself since 1968. Thus, the notion rather than strictly according to the let- a) The Tension Between the Second and that Orthodoxy is merely a feder- ter. Judgments “ac- Third Romes ation of sister churches with total cording to oikonomia” independence has been confirmed. may be perceived This tension raises the problem of the The recent Council of Zagorsk [to- as either lenient or universal structure of the Church. day Sergiyev Posad] marked the stringent, but are always directed culmination of this “absolute auto- towards ultimate In 1969 and 1970, the Patriarchate cephalism,” since Orthodox guests healing. of Moscow made importance deci- attended but did not participate in 52 the debates, even in those that were Patriarch Athenag- pan-Orthodox in scope: for example, oras I of Constanti- when the anathemas against the Old nople, 1967. Photo: Pieter Jongerhuis / Believers instituted by the Coun- Anefo, CC BY-SA cil of Moscow of 1666–67, in which 3.0 nl. the Patriarchates of Alexandria and Antioch had taken a full part, were lifted. On the other hand, one might won- der whether, for Moscow, in this confederation of sister churches, the © 2020 The Wheel. problem of primacy does not arise in May be distributed for terms of historical number, power, noncommercial use. and initiative of these churches. www.wheeljournal.com From these perspectives, the conflict with Constantinople is deep. Constan- tinople regards its traditional preroga- tives of presidency, initiative, and be- ing the universal center of communion as being challenged; it sees its mystery denied—this mystery of a charismat- Moscow to insist that the churches it ic geography which, after the great regards as autocephalous (Poland, invasions, preserved the primacy of Czechoslovakia, and especially Amer- an almost-deserted Rome; it senses ica) be invited as such. the ascendency of the negation of its very existence, having already been so b) Towards a New Schism of “Old Believers” maltreated by history. And certainly, the historical sins of Constantinople Another fault line appears today in Orthodoxy, which manifests itself are great, through the frequent con- 3 in particular in the growing role of Evgraf Evgrafovich fusion of spiritual Hellenism and na- Kovalevsky (1905– tional Hellenism. It is all the more re- the “Russian Church Abroad” or the 70) was ordained as grettable that they were denounced at “Synodal Church” [the Russian Or- a priest of the Patri- the moment when Athenagoras I had thodox Church Outside of Russia]. archate of Moscow. largely overcome them to promote a This Church seeks herself to consti- For much of his life, tute a universal Orthodox Church: he was involved in selfless gathering of Orthodoxy. the leadership of Be that as it may, the conflict between she has received in her bosom Serbs, various “Western the two churches and the two eccle- Romanians, and French (and the para- Rite” Orthodox siologies is hardly conducive to the doxical logic which drives the French groups. These were meeting of a council. Certain officials community founded by Bishop John sometimes under Kovalesky toward her is easily de- the care of canonical of the Patriarchate of Moscow seem to Orthodox bishops have decided to delay this meeting, bunked); she has just given a bishop to and at other times without doubt fearing that the coun- the Greek partisans of the “Old Calen- independent and cil, if it meets during the lifetime of dar”; and she enjoys great support in uncanonical. The Athenagoras I, its true promoter, will the Balkans, notably from the Serbian active successor to confirm the prerogatives of Constan- Church and Mount Athos. 3 these groups is the “Catholic Orthodox tinople. The means of slowing down Church of France,” the conciliar process, when necessary, The rise of the phenomenon of the which has been un- have all been found: it is enough for “Synod” and the parallel or con- canonical since 1992. The Wheel 20 | Winter 2020 53 vergent phenomena of “Old Belief” • by the more general fact that, in (the version of the twentieth century the crisis of civilization in which awakening while the version of the we find ourselves (and which has seventeenth century fades away) may provoked spectacular convul- be explained: sions in Western Christianity), many Orthodox are trying to pro- • by the stagnating effect of most tect themselves by constituting of the European Communist re- Orthodoxy as a tradition-trans- gimes and the resulting impres- mission cemented by rites, by a sion of a slow asphyxiation of literal reading of doctrine and the the churches, which promotes, in fathers, and by an anti-intellectu- the “opposition” to these church- al pietism. This phenomenon is es among certain factions of the reminiscent of the fate of Judaism emigration, corresponding psy- at the time of its dispersion into a chological reactions of apocalyp- hostile world. ticism and quasi-Manichaeism; Here also we encounter the refusal • by the lack of cooperation be- of the council, in a double opposition tween the episcopate and the to the broadly “demonized” contem- faithful, especially, but not only, porary world and to ecumenical dia- in certain churches of the East, logue (the truth, objectified and pos- which explains why the main ini- sessed, does not enter into dialogue; it tiatives of the episcopate in the is here, so it is no longer there). Most of ecumenical domain, as well as the the bishops of the countries of the East inter-Orthodox domain, have not are charged with complicity with the been received by the people; atheism of the State—and it is quite Metropolitan Pimen (Izvekov) pres- ents the Tomos of Autocephaly of the Orthodox Church in America to Bishop Theodosius (Lazor), 1970. Photo: Orthodox Church in America. 54 true that if a council were to meet, ed in the 1960s: between a Russian © 2020 The Wheel. the theological and spiritual forces of Church, strong in its own bonds, ma- May be distributed for these churches would be perhaps only tured by the sorrowful patience of its noncommercial use. www.wheeljournal.com partially represented. The Ecumenical people and bishops, not just a unique Patriarch himself is charged with “Pa- womb of the universal Church but a pism” and with doctrinal and ecclesi- servant of Orthodox unity, a great na- ological relativism. tional church inseparably linked with the tragic—even Christlike—destiny In order to understand the impor- of Russia; and an Ecumenical Throne tance of this movement, it is necessary transfiguring its historical weakness to know that it extends far beyond in the humble and tenacious creation the “Synodal” jurisdiction alone, of an authentic “presidency of love,” which is content to use it on occasion always exercised after consultation and to amplify it through its publi- with the sister churches, to ensure cations. The anathemas which the their cohesion and common witness. Patriarchate of Moscow is preparing One could cry bitterly and make pen- to launch against the “Synod” will ance for having failed to appreciate no doubt strengthen it: will they not this kairos, this time of grace offered come first and foremost from persons by God to his people, and having al- denounced as “uniates” and “cryp- lowed both the demons to appear and to-communists”? The “Old Belief,” one’s brothers to become wolves, so which is presently found everywhere that each sees only the worst in the in Orthodoxy, is made up of all those other.