Επίκαιρη και ιδιαίτερα διαφωτιστική είναι η μελέτη της Επίκ. Καθηγήτριας του Τμ. Θεολογίας της Θεολογικής Σχολής ΕΚΠΑ για την εκτίμηση της συμμετοχής της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος στους οικουμενικούς διαλόγους και την αξιολόγηση της πρόσφατης εξέλιξης στους κόλπους της Ιεραρχίας της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος με αφορμή τη σύγκληση της Αγίας και Μεγάλης Συνόδου της Ορθόδοξης Εκκλησίας.
Vassiliki Stathokosta, “Ecumenical Dialogue in the Perspective of the Church οf Greece”, (originally published in Orthodox Handbook on Ecumenism (ed. P. Kalaitzidis, Th. FitzGerald etc), Volos Academy Publications in cooperation with WCC Publications, Geneva and Regnum Books International, Oxford, Volos/Greece 2014, pp. 386-397.
INTRODUCTION
The study of the relationship between the Church of Greece and the Ecumenical Movement goes back to the very beginning of this Movement. The time we refer to is the late nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century, when efforts for dialogue among Christians began and seemed to progress in a much promising way. Church of Greece alongside the Ecumenical Patriarchate contributed a great deal for the development of inter-Christian relations that gradually led to the formation of the WCC and its first Assembly in 1948. Our research process, based on bibliography and mainly on the WCC’s archive material, shows clearly the eagerness and vivid activity of brilliant Greek hierarchs and lay theologians to work for the restoration of Christian unity. They served the ecumenical purpose either as representatives of the Church of Greece or the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Furthermore, Greek theologians participated in delegations of other Patriarchates (Alexandria and Jerusalem) or autocephalous Churches (Church of Cyprus), in ecumenical assemblies and conferences. This participation of the Church of Greece in the Ecumenical Movement is an undeniable fact that counts one century of life and it consistently continues until today.
BRIEF NOTE ON THE THEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The process of the ecumenical involvement of the Orthodox and the Church of Greece in particular, is closely related to the general endeavour for the unity of Christendom as a continuous care of the Church since the apostolic era and the patristic period of time. Unity is after all the very essence of Christian faith and life, according the Gospel’s teaching and the liturgical demand. The Orthodox pray for peace of all the world, stability of the holy churches of God and the unity of all. The Orthodox as the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church has a special task to give Orthodox witness to the world, even to Christians who are separated from the Orthodox; to introduce them the faith and tradition of the undivided Church of the first eight centuries and the seven Ecumenical Councils, which is common to all. We should always remind that the great family of Christianity had been united before the separation of the fifteenth (Fourth Ecumenical Synod of Chalcedon, 451), eleventh (the Great Schism, 1054) and sixteenth century (the Reformation, 1517).
All these divisions were never accepted as a normal status either in the West or in the East. On the contrary, they were faced as a great failure, a wound inside the body of Church, which ought to be healed. That is why it was since the eleventh century, after the Great Schism (1054) that efforts for dialogue began but eventually failed as their motives were not purely of theological origin. Those were rushed efforts sprung mostly from political causes as it was the case for Western Church, or from necessity as it was the case for Eastern Church. The desire of West to expand its imperium in the East and the need of East to find allies for its protection against enemies in its eastern boarders was not a solid basis for dialogue. That is why these efforts for Christian unity ended up with failure, in meetings such as the second synod of Lyon and the Ferrara-Florence synod, leaving behind disappointment and fear for the Orthodox and deteriorating relations between East and West.
A further division in the body of the Western Church, the Reformation, occurred in the sixteenth century. Efforts for inter-Christian relations had been made mainly on the initiative of the Reformation since its early steps when its representatives turned to the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Dialogue between Luther, Melanchthon and theologians from Tubingen Theological School with Ecumenical Patriarchate was a great step for Reformation and Orthodoxy to meet each other. At the same time, Orthodox expressed their interest to find out the principles of Reformation as well as what their expectations should be concerning this new ecclesiastical reality. However, the status of Orthodoxy that time as subjected to Ottoman Empire did not allow any further developments. As the deceased Prof. Nikos Matsoukas noticed:
“That position of the Ecumenical Patriarchate meant that it was still open to dialogue and mainly to any possible progress in Ecumenism … so that later on and in better circumstances a new approach on this matter would be easier”.
Actually, a positive evolution occurred when the Anglicans turned to the Orthodox East (seventeenth century onwards) seeking for dialogue and agreement in several church matters. As the British Empire expanded all over the world, many Anglicans found themselves leaving in the East among Orthodox. They approached Orthodox seeking for cooperation mainly in pastoral matters (e.g. funerals etc). In this frame the issue of validity of the Anglican orders was raised and Greek theologians alongside with Russians and others started to study it in the early twentieth century. Orthodox officially recognized in their meeting in Holy Mountain, Athos, in 1930, that Anglicans paid respect to Orthodoxy and they did not conduct any proselytism against the Orthodox flock. This observation made dialogue with the Orthodox much easier. These Anglican – Orthodox contacts cultivated a set of good presuppositions for the rapprochement between East and West and the development of the Ecumenical Movement of the twentieth century.
CHURCH OF GREECE AND THE FORMATION OF THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT
Finally, in the early twentieth century different political and social changes shaped a new landscape, enabling church relations. The suffering of humanity due to the two world wars led to an urgent demand for reconciliation and unity; Churches were called to contribute for this purpose giving witness of their faith that peace is Christ according Saint Paul’s saying “for he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility” (Eph. 2:14). Soon they realized they had to put aside their dogmatic differences in order to work together for the preservation of human life and dignity.
That means that in the twentieth century the issue of Christian unity was not only a theological matter but an urgent demand of humanity as well. The issue of giving witness of Christian faith was a common task for Churches and it was at stake. That is why the twentieth has been characterized as the century of the ecumenical movement. That was the very moment the ecumenical movement was shaped and flourished as efforts for Christian unity were engaged in West and East either by Churches or individuals, in a very careful and methodical way. They tried to achieve their aim through two different ways. The first one was going through church cooperation on practical matters and it gradually led to the formation of “Life and Work” (LW) Movement. The second one was through studies and discussions on dogmatic issues and it led to “Faith and Order” Movement (FO). In those efforts of the twentieth century, first step for inter-Christian dialogue was made mostly by individuals, prominent theologians as well as clergymen from Europe and USA. Greek theologians were present from the beginning and they had been the pioneers on behalf of Orthodoxy for a long time, following the tradition of dialogue of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church in general and the practice the Ecumenical Patriarchate had inaugurated since the sixteenth century in particular. Because of political situation in Europe, Greeks were mostly the ones who contacted relations with Western Christians, as other Orthodox living in countries of communist regime, did not have such a possibility especially after 1945. Officially it was the Congress of Moscow in 1948 that condemned the Ecumenical Movement. However, the Russian Diaspora in Paris and elsewhere contributed a great deal with its prominent theologians as Fr. G. Florovsky and others, as members of the delegations of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
Members of the Church of Greece participated in most of the pioneer ecumenical bodies developed at the first half of the twentieth century, as it was the “World Alliance for International Friendship through the Churches” (1914). Professors of Theological Faculty of Athens Am. Alivizatos, Chrysostomos Papadopoulos (Archimandrite and later on Archbishop of Athens and All Greece), K. Dyovouniotis, Gr. Papamichael and D. Balanos were present in this endeavour. Similarly, Church of Greece supported with eagerness LW and FO from the very begging. She sent representatives to the ecumenical congresses of LW in Geneva (1920), Stockholm (1925) and Oxford (1937). We should underline that the Orthodox participation in the first congress of LW was a strong motive and an encouragement for the participation of the Anglican and the Old Catholic Church in this movement.
The Church of Greece was supportive to FO and its task to study dogmatic issues and find solutions to problems that dogmatic differences created to Churches. It is worth mentioning that Church of Greece was informed about this initiative from its very beginning, she expressed her sincere interest and she kept a positive attitude. She considered that the purpose of FO, as Prof. Alivizatos wrote:
“was identical to the very desire of Jesus ‘that may all be one’ (John 17, 21)”.
Consequently, the Church of Greece took part in the FO congresses in Geneva (1920), Lausanne (1927) and Edinburgh (1937) and contributed a great deal to its work and its theological development.
Her participation in LW and FO, although numerically small, either positive or criticizing, formed with other participants the decisions of these congresses. At this period of time, starting from 1920 until 1937, the participation of the Orthodox Church was based on the participation of each Autocephalous Church separately. There wasn’t any Pan-Orthodox meeting prior, to decide their common attitude, so often there had been different approaches. Briefly, that time there were two ways of perception and attitude the Orthodox expressed: the first one was expressed by the Greek-speaking delegates that emphasized discussions on practical matters; the other one was expressed by the Slavophones who showed their preference to dogmatic discussion. Greek representatives in those congresses tried to communicate all about their work to the Holy Synod as well as to the flock.
However the most important effort for church unity came from Orthodoxy herself and the Mother Church of Constantinople, the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Orthodox Church not only did not rely on the status of separation of all these centuries but she took a radical initiative for restoration of unity. The Patriarchαc Letters of 1902-1904 and mostly the one in 1920 addressed to “all Churches of Christ” showed the way to begin and commit in a serious effort for achieving church unity. In these letters there is a significant contribution of members of the Church of Greece yet not widely known. The contribution of Archbishop of Syros, Tinos and Milos, Alexandros Lykourgos in the formulation of the Patriarchic letters of 1902-1904 and 1920 is one of them. Furthermore, it was Professor Alivizatos from Athens’ University who presented this Encyclical letter (1920) at the FO congress in Geneva (1920).
Also, it is not known well enough the preparatory work that was achieved in 1918 by the Greek delegation to USA and England, where they had discussions with Episcopalians and Anglicans respectively. The Professors of the Theological School of Athens, Archimandrite Chrysostomos Papadopoulos and Hamilkar Alivizatos, authors of the Report to the Holy Synod, concluded:
“the Anglican Church, ‘rejecting the character of Protestantism on one hand and avoiding the extremes of Papacy on the other, is similar to our Church through its teaching and its worship and its religious life. … Our personal observations convinced us that the Anglican Church worships God properly”.
We should notice that those contacts had been a decisive step towards the formation of the Ecumenical Movement in general.
All these initiatives for church unity went on despite serious obstacles caused by the Second World War and led to the formation of the WCC.
CHURCH OF GREECE AND THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES
The work of all these endeavours of the pioneers, churchmen and theologians, as Visser’t Hooft, Am. Alivizatos and many others, resulted in the formation of the WCC. In its frame the participation of the Church of Greece took an official, namely an ecclesiastical, character, as it was the case with all member Churches as well. At Amsterdam Greek theologians participated not as individuals but as official church representatives. That was the case in all following general assemblies as the members of the delegations in official conferences of the WCC were, and they still are, nominated by the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece.
Landmarks in the participation of the Church of Greece in the WCC
1. Amsterdam to New Delhi
Soon after the Second World War, WCC was a very significant event and a certain reality in Churches’ life. The WCC embraced not only a great number of “Churches” and its broad field of activities, but also the variety and intensity of discussions caused concerning its nature, its aims and the way of its work and function. In these discussions the representatives of the Church of Greece were extremely active and they contributed a great deal for the clarification of its nature and task. Especially after the Amsterdam Assembly questions of a) the Constitution of the WCC and the presuppositions required by a Christian community to be accepted in the WCC as a church member, b) the relation of the WCC to its member Churches, c) the ecclesiastical or ecclesiological character of the WCC, were elaborated in a much fruitful way that led to further developments in the WCC. It was two years later that the Central Committee in Toronto (1950) gave answers to these burning questions with the text on the Nature of the WCC. Although there was not any Greek participation in Toronto, the work the Orthodox had offered is shown clearly in this very document. These separate Statements they submitted the previous years urged the WCC to formulate and clarify its identity, method of work and theological orientation.
Another landmark in the Ecumenical Movement was the assembly in New Delhi when, following the hard theological work of the Greeks alongside with other church representatives, there had been a new formula for the basis of the WCC’s Constitution, stating clearly faith to the triune God: “The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour according to the Scriptures, and therefore seek to fulfill together their common calling to the glory of the One God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit”.
It was important that just prior to N. Delhi a Pan-Orthodox meeting took place in Rhodes (24 Sept. - 10 Oct. 1961). Representatives of fourteen Orthodox Autocephalous Churches, (Greeks, Slavs, Romanians and Arabs), decided that they are positive to participation in the ecumenical movement, stressing that the Patriarchal Encyclical of 1920 must remain the basis of all efforts of Orthodox Christianity towards Christian unity. In New Delhi (1961), when the Russians joined the WCC, the Orthodox participation was reinforced and no more Statements were needed as there was enough Orthodox participation and their voice was heard enough.
During these first twelve years of the WCC, the participation of the Greeks was very active indeed. In 1958 - 1974, N. Nissiotis was appointed as a director of the Ecumenical Institute of Bossey. He also served as a Deputy General Secretary of the WCC (1967-1972). At the General Assembly in Nairobi (1975) he was elected moderator of the Commission on Faith and Order. Under his leadership the elaboration of the three convergence documents concerning Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry was accomplished. As the deceased Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, Christodoulos stated:
“Nissiotis was an ambassador of the idea of the participation of all Orthodox Churches in WCC, but mostly he supported something beyond the ordinary, the awareness of all Churches in the whole course of ecumenical movement”.
During that period, the Church of Greece contributed for the development and maturation of the WCC. Prof. Alivizatos was a pioneer of the ecumenical movement; he was the coordinator of the efforts for church unity in West and East. His cooperation and intense efforts with Visser’t Hooft resulted in the acceptance of WCC by the Orthodox Churches in the East. The contribution of many Greek hierarchs and professors was also important.
The issues Orthodox representatives introduced to the WCC contributed a great deal to its theological growth as they managed to turn the interest of the WCC to matters of theology and ecclesiology. Due to the persistence of the Orthodox and the theological argumentation they developed, issues of the place of eucharist in the Church, the sacraments, the place of saints and Holy Mary, church tradition and its continuality, proselytism and religious liberty, were included in the agenda of the WCC. Thus a serious ecumenical dialogue was developed. Their insistence to project the Orthodox teaching concerning the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church led to the Toronto statement. We should mention no more here as the issue of the Orthodox contribution the WCC will be studied in extension in another section of this handbook.
2. The post New Delhi era
After the New Delhi assembly, a new era started for Church of Greece and her participation in the WCC. Radical political changes took place in Greece that ended in the abolishment of democracy by a military dictatorship. WCC’s efforts to correspond to appeals against tortures that political prisoners suffered and for respect of human rights caused disturbance to its totalitarian Government as well as to church leadership, which resulted to abstain from the Uppsala assembly (1968). The attitude of the deceased Hieronymus Kotsonis, archbishop of that time (1967-1973) and a prominent professor of University is still a matter of question. Although he was supportive for the participation of the Orthodox and himself served in the Ecumenical Movement, he suddenly turned to support the dictatorship’s decisions, accused the WCC, and even objected to the participation of the Church of Greece. However, there had been Greek theologians that took part in Uppsala as members of other Orthodox delegations. Soon after, that crisis was over when Hieronymus officially confirmed that the Church of Greece should participate in the ecumenical movement.
Definitely, the participation of the Church of Greece in the ecumenical movement is based on the decisions of her Holy Synod, according the synodical system. However, for the economy of this study we refer to certain periods of time according the time of service of different Archbishops, also serving as Presidents of the Holy Synod.
So, especially after 1973 when Seraphim, was elected to the Archbishopric (1973-1998), Greek Church as well as the majority of Orthodox in general took some reservation towards WCC as its agenda turned to be overfilled with social issues. Greeks protested that this emphasis was harmful for its very essence and definitely for the Orthodox participation. There is no doubt that Seraphim favored the ecumenical orientation of the Church of Greece as following:
“The initiative as well the responsibility belongs to our Ecumenical Patriarchate, the respectful head of Orthodoxy that Church of Greece follows in great respect”.
However the abovementioned reservation was kept in 80s as well, as Seraphim did not encourage the participation of Church of Greece in the WCC although he was not against it. On the contrary, he considered that Church of Greece has the possibility and the obligation to keep a leading role to dialogue worldwide due to historical and national reasons. He considered that Greek Theological Faculties have theologians of high level for this task which should always be fulfilled in cooperation with the Ecumenical Patriarchate that anyhow has the leading role in this special matter.
The fact that Seraphim was rather indifferent for WCC was the result of three main factors. First, he became Archbishop at a crucial historical moment when the most urgent need was reconciliation inside Greek Church, plus reconciliation of Greek society with institutional church as she was blamed for cooperation with the dictatorship. So, he chose to keep a low profile for the Church. Second, he simultaneously blamed WCC for its agenda, being of mostly social and not theological character. Third, Seraphim was a genius -but very practical- man and he could not perceive any particular utility in participation of the Church of Greece in WCC. Besides, he relied on his believe that this was mainly a task of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. However, the participation of the Church of Greece continues but in a rather distant way; WCC was seen mostly as a bureaucratic affair and the participation of the Church of Greece in it as a matter of external church affairs. That attitude went on until the death of Seraphim in 1996. However, the theological contribution of Greek representatives in the ecumenical endeavour kept on.
Despite the above mentioned situation, in the 90s a revival of the ecumenical interest is noticed in Greece in the field of theological studies, mainly in the Faculty of Theology in Thessaloniki. This interest is manifested in studies, publications, conferences, as well as in theological education at all levels. Theology is characterized by its opening up and its desire to communicate and collaborate with the West. This desire seemed to be favoured by the entrance of Greece in the European Union (1992) as well as by the development of European exchange programmes for studies and teaching in European Universities. So, an opening up of Theology to society and the world and many ecumenical initiatives are noticed, aiming to emphasize the original characteristic of the Church of Christ, e.g. openness and dialogue with the world and its needs in order to witness the Orthodox faith and address to all people the redeeming word of the Gospel. It is worth mentioning the cooperation of the Faculty of Theology in Thessaloniki with the WCC and the Ecumenical Institute of Bossey that gave the fruits of a conference on “Classical Theology and Contectual Theology” (Thessaloniki 1992) and the seminary on “Orthodox Theology and Spirituality’ (Thessaloniki 1994). At the same time the “Society for Ecumenical Studies and Inter-Orthodox Relations” (Thessaloniki 1993) was founded under the presidency of Prof. Dr. N. Zacharopoulos and Metropolitan of Ephesos Prof. Chrysostomos Konstantinidis, in order to cultivate inter-Orthodox communication, study of inter-Christian dialogue and promotion of Orthodox theological thought in the modern ecumenical debate.
Later on, archbishop Christodoulos (1996-2008) who was very extroverted highly educated and a brilliant personality, had an ecumenical vision himself. He worked for the cultivation of Inter-Orthodox and Inter-Christian relations. He even paid a visit to WCC in Geneva and he restored the reputation and honoured the work of Nikos Nissiotis by establishing a special scholarship in memory of him for ecumenical studies in Bossey.
3) Canberra to Thessaloniki and the Special Commission: Reservations towards the participation in WCC
Meanwhile the Orthodox noticed were serious problems in the WCC. Alongside the ecumenical orientation of the Church of Greece in the 90s, the revival of proselytism, an extremely burning issue for the Orthodox, came up. WCC was very helpful to the Orthodox by paying attention to their theological argumentation and condemning proselytism as a non Christian, hostile act. Still, there were many unresolved problems related to the theological and ecclesiological dimension of the Orthodox participation in the WCC. As the Great Protopresbyter G. Tsetsis concludes:
“These problems were at times demonstrated by the Churches of Constantinople, Russia, Romania and Greece, on the occasion of various commemorations or on the eve of General Assemblies of the WCC and other official or unofficial inter-Orthodox entities like the New Valamo Consultation (1977), the Symposium of Sofia (1982) and mostly the Third Preconciliar Pan-Orthodox Conference (1986)”.
Serious problems occurred especially during the 7th General Assembly in Canberra (1991) caused by the way its main theme on pneumatology was approached by certain speakers. In 1998, just before the 8th Assembly in Harrare, a joint Orthodox-WCC meeting was held in Thessaloniki to study all these issues. Definitely, both sides wished to strive for the amelioration of their relation. This meeting gave a clear message to WCC about the problems Orthodox face and their pursuits. As the Great Protopresbyter fr G. Tsetsis underlines:
“This message was that the Orthodox Church can no longer give "the green light" to any theological, ethical or social innovation that the various protestant denominations or lobbies try to impose to the rest of the Christian world through the WCC”.
Soon after, at the General Assembly in Harrare, WCC responded to the Orthodox challenge by establishing a “Special Commission for the Orthodox participation in the WCC”. The new frame shaped by the Special Commission is the one in which Church of Greece carries on her participation and work in the WCC. The core of the debate developed in this Commission is ecclesiology. Briefly, it addresses the following question to the member Churches:
"To the Orthodox: 'Is there space for other churches in Orthodox ecclesiology? How would this space and its limits be described?' And to the churches of the Reformed: 'How does your church understand, maintain and express your belonging to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic church?'" (para. 16).
Actually, the Special Commission has tried to examine once more the “ecclesiologic challenge” the Orthodox participation implies to the WCC. A first reaction is already reflected in the Toronto Statement but it does not seem that we have moved further since then. Rather it is commonly accepted that the whole matter is still an open issue. As his Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch expresses it:
“Are we today prepared, as member churches, to reaffirm the role of the Council as a privileged ecumenical space, where... the churches will continue to break down the barriers that prevent them from recognizing one another as churches confessing a common faith, administering the same baptism, and celebrating the Eucharist together, so that the community, which is what they now are, can become a communion in the faith, in sacramental life and in witness?”.
We should not refer further to the issue of the work and contribution of Special Commission as there is another special study in this handbook.
Several Greeks are engaged in studying the issue of ecclesiology and participation in the ongoing discussion. Their work is reflected in the publication of two very important documents: “The nature and mission of the Church: A Stage on the Way to a Common Statement (Faith and Order Paper 198), published by the WCC, and “The Church of Triune God: The Church of the Triune God: The Cyprus Agreed Statement”, which is the last text of that kind the International Commission for the Anglican - Orthodox Theological Dialogue has issued.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF ECUMENICAL THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION
IN THEOLOGICAL SCHOOLS
Theological Faculties in Athens and Thessaloniki Universities are really active in the Ecumenical Movement. There are specialized professors who teach Ecumenical Movement and inter-Christian dialogues. In Athens University there is in the curricula a main course on “Symbolic Theology and Ecumenical Movement”. Ecumenical Theological Education is a significant matter for both Faculties.
Recently, one can notice a trend for studying the income of the theological dialogue and its fruits until today, with a certain aim, namely to move further on. That means, in other words, that the ecumenical income should be the springboard for future developments soon. Two meetings held in Athens recently mark this trend. Their agenda and studies referred to the evaluation of this participation all these years. The first one was about “Dialogues of Orthodoxy – The Orthodox Witness” (Faculty of Theology, May 2010) and dealt with the income of the bilateral dialogue between church traditions closer to Orthodoxy (Roman Catholics, Anglicans, and Old Catholics) by the representatives of the Church of Greece (Metropolitan of Messinia - Prof. Dr. Chrysostomos Savvatos and Prof. Dr. Milt. Konstantinou) and of the Ecumenical Patriarchate (Prof. Dr. K. Delikostantis) in these dialogues. The speakers focused mostly about the perspectives of these dialogues. The second one was a conference in Pentelei Monastery on “Theological Studies and Ecumene: With reference to the participation of the Orthodox Church in the Inter-Christian Dialogues and its future (March 2011). An evaluation of the work and perspectives of the Special Commission had been achieved in this second meeting by two pioneers of this endavour, the Great Protopresbyter Fr George Tsetsis and the Deputy Secretary General of the WCC Yorgo Lemopoulos. The meeting engaged in the discussion of the evaluation of the Orthodox – FO relation in which contributed the Metropolitan of Konstantia and Ammohostos Vassileios and the well-known Mary Tunner, moderator of FO in the past and president of WCC for Europe at this time.
Both meetings were initiatives of the Metropolitan of Messinia Prof. Dr. Chrysostomos Savvatos and they show the desire of the Theological Schools to reclaim the progress of the ecumenical dialogue achieved until now and to contribute themselves, to bring new ideas and claims from and in the ecumenical movement.
CONCLUSION
The Church of Greece contributed a great deal for the formation and development of the Ecumenical Movement. This contribution started in the late nineteenth – early twentieth century and it is going on until today. Nowadays, Church of Greece counts one hundred years in the ecumenical movement, not as a simple member but as a foundational factor for its genesis and formation and she has a decisive role in the development of the ongoing discussion. She conducts a good fight for achieving dialogue and give the Orthodox witness (“be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you”. A Pet. 3:15). Orthodox cooperation under the spiritual guidance of the Ecumenical Patriarchate is a guarantee for good results. Also, the existing cooperation between the institutional church and the Theological Faculties plays a crucial role for achieving a significant contribution in this task. As the deceased Archbishop Seraphim stated:
“we have at our disposal a theological human resource of the highest quality in our Theological Faculties and we can and we are obliged, due to historical and national reasons as well, to claim for a leading position in the world dialogues…”.
However, as much as certain is the participation of the Church of Greece in the WCC since its very begging, it is also certain that often there are voices claiming to abstain from the ecumenical movement in general. These voices are expressed mostly in the internet in several blogs of traditionalist individuals. However, they have some influence to people as they exercise their anti-ecumenical propaganda in terms of a polemic attack against enemies that intend to destroy the Greek nation and its Orthodox identity. In a time of crisis as it is now in Greece, such a simplistic, “xenophobic” argumentation is easy to be spread. Still, Church of Greece and the Archbishop Hieronymus II with the Holy Synod keep a serious and responsible attitude towards the WCC approving the participation in it and keep on the good relation as it is the case all these years. Of course, there are more to be done. There is no doubt that the economic crisis in Greece and Europe in general will cause problems to our societies, even the raising of fundamentalism, racism etc. That is why it is an urgent need for Churches to keep on working together.
The study of the relationship between the Church of Greece and the Ecumenical Movement goes back to the very beginning of this Movement. The time we refer to is the late nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century, when efforts for dialogue among Christians began and seemed to progress in a much promising way. Church of Greece alongside the Ecumenical Patriarchate contributed a great deal for the development of inter-Christian relations that gradually led to the formation of the WCC and its first Assembly in 1948. Our research process, based on bibliography and mainly on the WCC’s archive material, shows clearly the eagerness and vivid activity of brilliant Greek hierarchs and lay theologians to work for the restoration of Christian unity. They served the ecumenical purpose either as representatives of the Church of Greece or the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Furthermore, Greek theologians participated in delegations of other Patriarchates (Alexandria and Jerusalem) or autocephalous Churches (Church of Cyprus), in ecumenical assemblies and conferences. This participation of the Church of Greece in the Ecumenical Movement is an undeniable fact that counts one century of life and it consistently continues until today.
BRIEF NOTE ON THE THEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The process of the ecumenical involvement of the Orthodox and the Church of Greece in particular, is closely related to the general endeavour for the unity of Christendom as a continuous care of the Church since the apostolic era and the patristic period of time. Unity is after all the very essence of Christian faith and life, according the Gospel’s teaching and the liturgical demand. The Orthodox pray for peace of all the world, stability of the holy churches of God and the unity of all. The Orthodox as the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church has a special task to give Orthodox witness to the world, even to Christians who are separated from the Orthodox; to introduce them the faith and tradition of the undivided Church of the first eight centuries and the seven Ecumenical Councils, which is common to all. We should always remind that the great family of Christianity had been united before the separation of the fifteenth (Fourth Ecumenical Synod of Chalcedon, 451), eleventh (the Great Schism, 1054) and sixteenth century (the Reformation, 1517).
All these divisions were never accepted as a normal status either in the West or in the East. On the contrary, they were faced as a great failure, a wound inside the body of Church, which ought to be healed. That is why it was since the eleventh century, after the Great Schism (1054) that efforts for dialogue began but eventually failed as their motives were not purely of theological origin. Those were rushed efforts sprung mostly from political causes as it was the case for Western Church, or from necessity as it was the case for Eastern Church. The desire of West to expand its imperium in the East and the need of East to find allies for its protection against enemies in its eastern boarders was not a solid basis for dialogue. That is why these efforts for Christian unity ended up with failure, in meetings such as the second synod of Lyon and the Ferrara-Florence synod, leaving behind disappointment and fear for the Orthodox and deteriorating relations between East and West.
A further division in the body of the Western Church, the Reformation, occurred in the sixteenth century. Efforts for inter-Christian relations had been made mainly on the initiative of the Reformation since its early steps when its representatives turned to the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Dialogue between Luther, Melanchthon and theologians from Tubingen Theological School with Ecumenical Patriarchate was a great step for Reformation and Orthodoxy to meet each other. At the same time, Orthodox expressed their interest to find out the principles of Reformation as well as what their expectations should be concerning this new ecclesiastical reality. However, the status of Orthodoxy that time as subjected to Ottoman Empire did not allow any further developments. As the deceased Prof. Nikos Matsoukas noticed:
“That position of the Ecumenical Patriarchate meant that it was still open to dialogue and mainly to any possible progress in Ecumenism … so that later on and in better circumstances a new approach on this matter would be easier”.
Actually, a positive evolution occurred when the Anglicans turned to the Orthodox East (seventeenth century onwards) seeking for dialogue and agreement in several church matters. As the British Empire expanded all over the world, many Anglicans found themselves leaving in the East among Orthodox. They approached Orthodox seeking for cooperation mainly in pastoral matters (e.g. funerals etc). In this frame the issue of validity of the Anglican orders was raised and Greek theologians alongside with Russians and others started to study it in the early twentieth century. Orthodox officially recognized in their meeting in Holy Mountain, Athos, in 1930, that Anglicans paid respect to Orthodoxy and they did not conduct any proselytism against the Orthodox flock. This observation made dialogue with the Orthodox much easier. These Anglican – Orthodox contacts cultivated a set of good presuppositions for the rapprochement between East and West and the development of the Ecumenical Movement of the twentieth century.
CHURCH OF GREECE AND THE FORMATION OF THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT
Finally, in the early twentieth century different political and social changes shaped a new landscape, enabling church relations. The suffering of humanity due to the two world wars led to an urgent demand for reconciliation and unity; Churches were called to contribute for this purpose giving witness of their faith that peace is Christ according Saint Paul’s saying “for he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility” (Eph. 2:14). Soon they realized they had to put aside their dogmatic differences in order to work together for the preservation of human life and dignity.
That means that in the twentieth century the issue of Christian unity was not only a theological matter but an urgent demand of humanity as well. The issue of giving witness of Christian faith was a common task for Churches and it was at stake. That is why the twentieth has been characterized as the century of the ecumenical movement. That was the very moment the ecumenical movement was shaped and flourished as efforts for Christian unity were engaged in West and East either by Churches or individuals, in a very careful and methodical way. They tried to achieve their aim through two different ways. The first one was going through church cooperation on practical matters and it gradually led to the formation of “Life and Work” (LW) Movement. The second one was through studies and discussions on dogmatic issues and it led to “Faith and Order” Movement (FO). In those efforts of the twentieth century, first step for inter-Christian dialogue was made mostly by individuals, prominent theologians as well as clergymen from Europe and USA. Greek theologians were present from the beginning and they had been the pioneers on behalf of Orthodoxy for a long time, following the tradition of dialogue of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church in general and the practice the Ecumenical Patriarchate had inaugurated since the sixteenth century in particular. Because of political situation in Europe, Greeks were mostly the ones who contacted relations with Western Christians, as other Orthodox living in countries of communist regime, did not have such a possibility especially after 1945. Officially it was the Congress of Moscow in 1948 that condemned the Ecumenical Movement. However, the Russian Diaspora in Paris and elsewhere contributed a great deal with its prominent theologians as Fr. G. Florovsky and others, as members of the delegations of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
Members of the Church of Greece participated in most of the pioneer ecumenical bodies developed at the first half of the twentieth century, as it was the “World Alliance for International Friendship through the Churches” (1914). Professors of Theological Faculty of Athens Am. Alivizatos, Chrysostomos Papadopoulos (Archimandrite and later on Archbishop of Athens and All Greece), K. Dyovouniotis, Gr. Papamichael and D. Balanos were present in this endeavour. Similarly, Church of Greece supported with eagerness LW and FO from the very begging. She sent representatives to the ecumenical congresses of LW in Geneva (1920), Stockholm (1925) and Oxford (1937). We should underline that the Orthodox participation in the first congress of LW was a strong motive and an encouragement for the participation of the Anglican and the Old Catholic Church in this movement.
The Church of Greece was supportive to FO and its task to study dogmatic issues and find solutions to problems that dogmatic differences created to Churches. It is worth mentioning that Church of Greece was informed about this initiative from its very beginning, she expressed her sincere interest and she kept a positive attitude. She considered that the purpose of FO, as Prof. Alivizatos wrote:
“was identical to the very desire of Jesus ‘that may all be one’ (John 17, 21)”.
Consequently, the Church of Greece took part in the FO congresses in Geneva (1920), Lausanne (1927) and Edinburgh (1937) and contributed a great deal to its work and its theological development.
Her participation in LW and FO, although numerically small, either positive or criticizing, formed with other participants the decisions of these congresses. At this period of time, starting from 1920 until 1937, the participation of the Orthodox Church was based on the participation of each Autocephalous Church separately. There wasn’t any Pan-Orthodox meeting prior, to decide their common attitude, so often there had been different approaches. Briefly, that time there were two ways of perception and attitude the Orthodox expressed: the first one was expressed by the Greek-speaking delegates that emphasized discussions on practical matters; the other one was expressed by the Slavophones who showed their preference to dogmatic discussion. Greek representatives in those congresses tried to communicate all about their work to the Holy Synod as well as to the flock.
However the most important effort for church unity came from Orthodoxy herself and the Mother Church of Constantinople, the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Orthodox Church not only did not rely on the status of separation of all these centuries but she took a radical initiative for restoration of unity. The Patriarchαc Letters of 1902-1904 and mostly the one in 1920 addressed to “all Churches of Christ” showed the way to begin and commit in a serious effort for achieving church unity. In these letters there is a significant contribution of members of the Church of Greece yet not widely known. The contribution of Archbishop of Syros, Tinos and Milos, Alexandros Lykourgos in the formulation of the Patriarchic letters of 1902-1904 and 1920 is one of them. Furthermore, it was Professor Alivizatos from Athens’ University who presented this Encyclical letter (1920) at the FO congress in Geneva (1920).
Also, it is not known well enough the preparatory work that was achieved in 1918 by the Greek delegation to USA and England, where they had discussions with Episcopalians and Anglicans respectively. The Professors of the Theological School of Athens, Archimandrite Chrysostomos Papadopoulos and Hamilkar Alivizatos, authors of the Report to the Holy Synod, concluded:
“the Anglican Church, ‘rejecting the character of Protestantism on one hand and avoiding the extremes of Papacy on the other, is similar to our Church through its teaching and its worship and its religious life. … Our personal observations convinced us that the Anglican Church worships God properly”.
We should notice that those contacts had been a decisive step towards the formation of the Ecumenical Movement in general.
All these initiatives for church unity went on despite serious obstacles caused by the Second World War and led to the formation of the WCC.
CHURCH OF GREECE AND THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES
The work of all these endeavours of the pioneers, churchmen and theologians, as Visser’t Hooft, Am. Alivizatos and many others, resulted in the formation of the WCC. In its frame the participation of the Church of Greece took an official, namely an ecclesiastical, character, as it was the case with all member Churches as well. At Amsterdam Greek theologians participated not as individuals but as official church representatives. That was the case in all following general assemblies as the members of the delegations in official conferences of the WCC were, and they still are, nominated by the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece.
Landmarks in the participation of the Church of Greece in the WCC
1. Amsterdam to New Delhi
Soon after the Second World War, WCC was a very significant event and a certain reality in Churches’ life. The WCC embraced not only a great number of “Churches” and its broad field of activities, but also the variety and intensity of discussions caused concerning its nature, its aims and the way of its work and function. In these discussions the representatives of the Church of Greece were extremely active and they contributed a great deal for the clarification of its nature and task. Especially after the Amsterdam Assembly questions of a) the Constitution of the WCC and the presuppositions required by a Christian community to be accepted in the WCC as a church member, b) the relation of the WCC to its member Churches, c) the ecclesiastical or ecclesiological character of the WCC, were elaborated in a much fruitful way that led to further developments in the WCC. It was two years later that the Central Committee in Toronto (1950) gave answers to these burning questions with the text on the Nature of the WCC. Although there was not any Greek participation in Toronto, the work the Orthodox had offered is shown clearly in this very document. These separate Statements they submitted the previous years urged the WCC to formulate and clarify its identity, method of work and theological orientation.
Another landmark in the Ecumenical Movement was the assembly in New Delhi when, following the hard theological work of the Greeks alongside with other church representatives, there had been a new formula for the basis of the WCC’s Constitution, stating clearly faith to the triune God: “The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour according to the Scriptures, and therefore seek to fulfill together their common calling to the glory of the One God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit”.
It was important that just prior to N. Delhi a Pan-Orthodox meeting took place in Rhodes (24 Sept. - 10 Oct. 1961). Representatives of fourteen Orthodox Autocephalous Churches, (Greeks, Slavs, Romanians and Arabs), decided that they are positive to participation in the ecumenical movement, stressing that the Patriarchal Encyclical of 1920 must remain the basis of all efforts of Orthodox Christianity towards Christian unity. In New Delhi (1961), when the Russians joined the WCC, the Orthodox participation was reinforced and no more Statements were needed as there was enough Orthodox participation and their voice was heard enough.
During these first twelve years of the WCC, the participation of the Greeks was very active indeed. In 1958 - 1974, N. Nissiotis was appointed as a director of the Ecumenical Institute of Bossey. He also served as a Deputy General Secretary of the WCC (1967-1972). At the General Assembly in Nairobi (1975) he was elected moderator of the Commission on Faith and Order. Under his leadership the elaboration of the three convergence documents concerning Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry was accomplished. As the deceased Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, Christodoulos stated:
“Nissiotis was an ambassador of the idea of the participation of all Orthodox Churches in WCC, but mostly he supported something beyond the ordinary, the awareness of all Churches in the whole course of ecumenical movement”.
During that period, the Church of Greece contributed for the development and maturation of the WCC. Prof. Alivizatos was a pioneer of the ecumenical movement; he was the coordinator of the efforts for church unity in West and East. His cooperation and intense efforts with Visser’t Hooft resulted in the acceptance of WCC by the Orthodox Churches in the East. The contribution of many Greek hierarchs and professors was also important.
The issues Orthodox representatives introduced to the WCC contributed a great deal to its theological growth as they managed to turn the interest of the WCC to matters of theology and ecclesiology. Due to the persistence of the Orthodox and the theological argumentation they developed, issues of the place of eucharist in the Church, the sacraments, the place of saints and Holy Mary, church tradition and its continuality, proselytism and religious liberty, were included in the agenda of the WCC. Thus a serious ecumenical dialogue was developed. Their insistence to project the Orthodox teaching concerning the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church led to the Toronto statement. We should mention no more here as the issue of the Orthodox contribution the WCC will be studied in extension in another section of this handbook.
2. The post New Delhi era
After the New Delhi assembly, a new era started for Church of Greece and her participation in the WCC. Radical political changes took place in Greece that ended in the abolishment of democracy by a military dictatorship. WCC’s efforts to correspond to appeals against tortures that political prisoners suffered and for respect of human rights caused disturbance to its totalitarian Government as well as to church leadership, which resulted to abstain from the Uppsala assembly (1968). The attitude of the deceased Hieronymus Kotsonis, archbishop of that time (1967-1973) and a prominent professor of University is still a matter of question. Although he was supportive for the participation of the Orthodox and himself served in the Ecumenical Movement, he suddenly turned to support the dictatorship’s decisions, accused the WCC, and even objected to the participation of the Church of Greece. However, there had been Greek theologians that took part in Uppsala as members of other Orthodox delegations. Soon after, that crisis was over when Hieronymus officially confirmed that the Church of Greece should participate in the ecumenical movement.
Definitely, the participation of the Church of Greece in the ecumenical movement is based on the decisions of her Holy Synod, according the synodical system. However, for the economy of this study we refer to certain periods of time according the time of service of different Archbishops, also serving as Presidents of the Holy Synod.
So, especially after 1973 when Seraphim, was elected to the Archbishopric (1973-1998), Greek Church as well as the majority of Orthodox in general took some reservation towards WCC as its agenda turned to be overfilled with social issues. Greeks protested that this emphasis was harmful for its very essence and definitely for the Orthodox participation. There is no doubt that Seraphim favored the ecumenical orientation of the Church of Greece as following:
“The initiative as well the responsibility belongs to our Ecumenical Patriarchate, the respectful head of Orthodoxy that Church of Greece follows in great respect”.
However the abovementioned reservation was kept in 80s as well, as Seraphim did not encourage the participation of Church of Greece in the WCC although he was not against it. On the contrary, he considered that Church of Greece has the possibility and the obligation to keep a leading role to dialogue worldwide due to historical and national reasons. He considered that Greek Theological Faculties have theologians of high level for this task which should always be fulfilled in cooperation with the Ecumenical Patriarchate that anyhow has the leading role in this special matter.
The fact that Seraphim was rather indifferent for WCC was the result of three main factors. First, he became Archbishop at a crucial historical moment when the most urgent need was reconciliation inside Greek Church, plus reconciliation of Greek society with institutional church as she was blamed for cooperation with the dictatorship. So, he chose to keep a low profile for the Church. Second, he simultaneously blamed WCC for its agenda, being of mostly social and not theological character. Third, Seraphim was a genius -but very practical- man and he could not perceive any particular utility in participation of the Church of Greece in WCC. Besides, he relied on his believe that this was mainly a task of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. However, the participation of the Church of Greece continues but in a rather distant way; WCC was seen mostly as a bureaucratic affair and the participation of the Church of Greece in it as a matter of external church affairs. That attitude went on until the death of Seraphim in 1996. However, the theological contribution of Greek representatives in the ecumenical endeavour kept on.
Despite the above mentioned situation, in the 90s a revival of the ecumenical interest is noticed in Greece in the field of theological studies, mainly in the Faculty of Theology in Thessaloniki. This interest is manifested in studies, publications, conferences, as well as in theological education at all levels. Theology is characterized by its opening up and its desire to communicate and collaborate with the West. This desire seemed to be favoured by the entrance of Greece in the European Union (1992) as well as by the development of European exchange programmes for studies and teaching in European Universities. So, an opening up of Theology to society and the world and many ecumenical initiatives are noticed, aiming to emphasize the original characteristic of the Church of Christ, e.g. openness and dialogue with the world and its needs in order to witness the Orthodox faith and address to all people the redeeming word of the Gospel. It is worth mentioning the cooperation of the Faculty of Theology in Thessaloniki with the WCC and the Ecumenical Institute of Bossey that gave the fruits of a conference on “Classical Theology and Contectual Theology” (Thessaloniki 1992) and the seminary on “Orthodox Theology and Spirituality’ (Thessaloniki 1994). At the same time the “Society for Ecumenical Studies and Inter-Orthodox Relations” (Thessaloniki 1993) was founded under the presidency of Prof. Dr. N. Zacharopoulos and Metropolitan of Ephesos Prof. Chrysostomos Konstantinidis, in order to cultivate inter-Orthodox communication, study of inter-Christian dialogue and promotion of Orthodox theological thought in the modern ecumenical debate.
Later on, archbishop Christodoulos (1996-2008) who was very extroverted highly educated and a brilliant personality, had an ecumenical vision himself. He worked for the cultivation of Inter-Orthodox and Inter-Christian relations. He even paid a visit to WCC in Geneva and he restored the reputation and honoured the work of Nikos Nissiotis by establishing a special scholarship in memory of him for ecumenical studies in Bossey.
3) Canberra to Thessaloniki and the Special Commission: Reservations towards the participation in WCC
Meanwhile the Orthodox noticed were serious problems in the WCC. Alongside the ecumenical orientation of the Church of Greece in the 90s, the revival of proselytism, an extremely burning issue for the Orthodox, came up. WCC was very helpful to the Orthodox by paying attention to their theological argumentation and condemning proselytism as a non Christian, hostile act. Still, there were many unresolved problems related to the theological and ecclesiological dimension of the Orthodox participation in the WCC. As the Great Protopresbyter G. Tsetsis concludes:
“These problems were at times demonstrated by the Churches of Constantinople, Russia, Romania and Greece, on the occasion of various commemorations or on the eve of General Assemblies of the WCC and other official or unofficial inter-Orthodox entities like the New Valamo Consultation (1977), the Symposium of Sofia (1982) and mostly the Third Preconciliar Pan-Orthodox Conference (1986)”.
Serious problems occurred especially during the 7th General Assembly in Canberra (1991) caused by the way its main theme on pneumatology was approached by certain speakers. In 1998, just before the 8th Assembly in Harrare, a joint Orthodox-WCC meeting was held in Thessaloniki to study all these issues. Definitely, both sides wished to strive for the amelioration of their relation. This meeting gave a clear message to WCC about the problems Orthodox face and their pursuits. As the Great Protopresbyter fr G. Tsetsis underlines:
“This message was that the Orthodox Church can no longer give "the green light" to any theological, ethical or social innovation that the various protestant denominations or lobbies try to impose to the rest of the Christian world through the WCC”.
Soon after, at the General Assembly in Harrare, WCC responded to the Orthodox challenge by establishing a “Special Commission for the Orthodox participation in the WCC”. The new frame shaped by the Special Commission is the one in which Church of Greece carries on her participation and work in the WCC. The core of the debate developed in this Commission is ecclesiology. Briefly, it addresses the following question to the member Churches:
"To the Orthodox: 'Is there space for other churches in Orthodox ecclesiology? How would this space and its limits be described?' And to the churches of the Reformed: 'How does your church understand, maintain and express your belonging to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic church?'" (para. 16).
Actually, the Special Commission has tried to examine once more the “ecclesiologic challenge” the Orthodox participation implies to the WCC. A first reaction is already reflected in the Toronto Statement but it does not seem that we have moved further since then. Rather it is commonly accepted that the whole matter is still an open issue. As his Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch expresses it:
“Are we today prepared, as member churches, to reaffirm the role of the Council as a privileged ecumenical space, where... the churches will continue to break down the barriers that prevent them from recognizing one another as churches confessing a common faith, administering the same baptism, and celebrating the Eucharist together, so that the community, which is what they now are, can become a communion in the faith, in sacramental life and in witness?”.
We should not refer further to the issue of the work and contribution of Special Commission as there is another special study in this handbook.
Several Greeks are engaged in studying the issue of ecclesiology and participation in the ongoing discussion. Their work is reflected in the publication of two very important documents: “The nature and mission of the Church: A Stage on the Way to a Common Statement (Faith and Order Paper 198), published by the WCC, and “The Church of Triune God: The Church of the Triune God: The Cyprus Agreed Statement”, which is the last text of that kind the International Commission for the Anglican - Orthodox Theological Dialogue has issued.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF ECUMENICAL THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION
IN THEOLOGICAL SCHOOLS
Theological Faculties in Athens and Thessaloniki Universities are really active in the Ecumenical Movement. There are specialized professors who teach Ecumenical Movement and inter-Christian dialogues. In Athens University there is in the curricula a main course on “Symbolic Theology and Ecumenical Movement”. Ecumenical Theological Education is a significant matter for both Faculties.
Recently, one can notice a trend for studying the income of the theological dialogue and its fruits until today, with a certain aim, namely to move further on. That means, in other words, that the ecumenical income should be the springboard for future developments soon. Two meetings held in Athens recently mark this trend. Their agenda and studies referred to the evaluation of this participation all these years. The first one was about “Dialogues of Orthodoxy – The Orthodox Witness” (Faculty of Theology, May 2010) and dealt with the income of the bilateral dialogue between church traditions closer to Orthodoxy (Roman Catholics, Anglicans, and Old Catholics) by the representatives of the Church of Greece (Metropolitan of Messinia - Prof. Dr. Chrysostomos Savvatos and Prof. Dr. Milt. Konstantinou) and of the Ecumenical Patriarchate (Prof. Dr. K. Delikostantis) in these dialogues. The speakers focused mostly about the perspectives of these dialogues. The second one was a conference in Pentelei Monastery on “Theological Studies and Ecumene: With reference to the participation of the Orthodox Church in the Inter-Christian Dialogues and its future (March 2011). An evaluation of the work and perspectives of the Special Commission had been achieved in this second meeting by two pioneers of this endavour, the Great Protopresbyter Fr George Tsetsis and the Deputy Secretary General of the WCC Yorgo Lemopoulos. The meeting engaged in the discussion of the evaluation of the Orthodox – FO relation in which contributed the Metropolitan of Konstantia and Ammohostos Vassileios and the well-known Mary Tunner, moderator of FO in the past and president of WCC for Europe at this time.
Both meetings were initiatives of the Metropolitan of Messinia Prof. Dr. Chrysostomos Savvatos and they show the desire of the Theological Schools to reclaim the progress of the ecumenical dialogue achieved until now and to contribute themselves, to bring new ideas and claims from and in the ecumenical movement.
CONCLUSION
The Church of Greece contributed a great deal for the formation and development of the Ecumenical Movement. This contribution started in the late nineteenth – early twentieth century and it is going on until today. Nowadays, Church of Greece counts one hundred years in the ecumenical movement, not as a simple member but as a foundational factor for its genesis and formation and she has a decisive role in the development of the ongoing discussion. She conducts a good fight for achieving dialogue and give the Orthodox witness (“be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you”. A Pet. 3:15). Orthodox cooperation under the spiritual guidance of the Ecumenical Patriarchate is a guarantee for good results. Also, the existing cooperation between the institutional church and the Theological Faculties plays a crucial role for achieving a significant contribution in this task. As the deceased Archbishop Seraphim stated:
“we have at our disposal a theological human resource of the highest quality in our Theological Faculties and we can and we are obliged, due to historical and national reasons as well, to claim for a leading position in the world dialogues…”.
However, as much as certain is the participation of the Church of Greece in the WCC since its very begging, it is also certain that often there are voices claiming to abstain from the ecumenical movement in general. These voices are expressed mostly in the internet in several blogs of traditionalist individuals. However, they have some influence to people as they exercise their anti-ecumenical propaganda in terms of a polemic attack against enemies that intend to destroy the Greek nation and its Orthodox identity. In a time of crisis as it is now in Greece, such a simplistic, “xenophobic” argumentation is easy to be spread. Still, Church of Greece and the Archbishop Hieronymus II with the Holy Synod keep a serious and responsible attitude towards the WCC approving the participation in it and keep on the good relation as it is the case all these years. Of course, there are more to be done. There is no doubt that the economic crisis in Greece and Europe in general will cause problems to our societies, even the raising of fundamentalism, racism etc. That is why it is an urgent need for Churches to keep on working together.