Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos and St Vlassios
Translation of the article in Greek Τό πολίτευμα τῆς Ὀρθοδόξου Ἐκκλησίας
Prompted
by the Ukrainian issue, there are discussions about ‘primacy’ within the
Church. Some people reject it, and others misinterpret it. The Roman
Catholics usually interpret primacy in terms of essentialism, and some
contemporary Orthodox theologians interpret it in terms of personalism.
My purpose
in the present article on this subject is not to set out the
theological dimensions of the problem, but to stress the fact that in
the Orthodox Church we speak more about the Church’s synodical and
hierarchical regime. Some views will be highlighted that I have
previously stressed in other contexts.
1. Synodality and the Hierarchical System
The
synodical regime of the Church is connected with the hierarchical
system, and in fact synodality (conciliarity) is stressed together with
the hierarchical system. In any case, this is true, from another
perspective, in states and in democratic regimes, as there is a popular
assembly, but, at the same time, there is also a hierarchy of ministries
and authorities: not everyone has the same rights and duties.
The Greek word synodos is made up of two words, syn ‘with’ and odos
‘way’, and denotes a shared journey. This is the context in which we
should look at the expression that the Divine Liturgy is a “synod of heaven and earth”, that is to say, a meeting and a shared journey.
The word hierarchy
denotes the leader of the sacred rites, the bishop or hierarch, but
also the hierarchical arrangement of charismas and ministries. The
synod, therefore, does not exclude the hierarchy, and the hierarchy does
not exclude the synod. We find this word hierarchy in the works of St
Dionysius the Areopagite, On the Celestial Hierarchy and On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy,
in which nine companies of angels are identified, which are divided
into three sets of three, and which are linked with the earthly
ecclesiastical hierarchy, as regards the rites (Baptism, Synaxis and
Chrism), the three stages of ascent to God (purification, illumination
and perfection), the three degrees of the priesthood (hierarch, priest
and deacon), and as regards the three orders of laity
(catechumens-excommunicated, faithful and therapeutae-monks). The phrase “functioning of the synodical regime” also denotes this reality.
It has
been observed (by Alexander Schmemann) that the Church’s regime is
regarded as “synodically hierarchical” or “hierarchically synodical”.
The hierarchical principal is not contrary to the synodical principle,
as the synodical principle is established by means of the hierarchical
principle. When one of the two is absent, the other cannot exist. In
that case, there is no real expression of the Church.
This
interpretative explanation of the terms is very useful for what will be
said below with regard to the functioning of the synodical and
hierarchical regime of the Church of Greece.
2. The Divine Liturgy as the Model of the Hierarchical Synodality of the Church
As we
know, the Church is the Body of Christ and the communion of deification,
which means that those who are members of the Church are members of the
Body of Christ and are on their way to deification. This is not a
static state, but continuous movement, an ongoing journey, which St
Maximus the Confessor calls “ever-moving stability” and “stationary
motion”: “It will acquire ever-moving stability, the never-ending
enjoyment of divine things, and stationary motion, the insatiable
appetite for these things.” The Church is not an established
institution, but an expedition in Christ, a journey towards
participation in the Kingdom of God. This Kingdom is experienced
starting from now, and it will come in its fullness in the future.
The Divine
Eucharist is the centre of ecclesiastical life. For this reason, the
manner in which the Divine Eucharist is celebrated depicts exactly what
the Church is, as well as showing what her ultimate aim is.
St Maximus the Confessor’s Mystagogy
makes clear the character and purpose of the Church and the Divine
Eucharist. Ecclesiology cannot be examined independently of
Eucharistology.
The Divine Eucharist is truly the “Synod of heaven and earth”. St John Chrysostom writes very characteristically:
“Oh,
how great are Christ’s gifts! Hosts of angels praise Him in heaven; in
churches on earth human choirs imitate their doxology. In heaven,
Seraphim sing aloud the thrice-holy hymn; on earth the human multitude
sings the same hymn. A common heavenly and earthly feast is celebrated:
one eucharist, one rejoicing, one joyful choir. The indescribable
condescension of the Lord has brought this about; the Holy Spirit has
put it together; and this harmony of sounds was orchestrated by the
Father’s good pleasure. From on high come harmonious melodies, and,
moved by the Holy Trinity as though by a plectrum, pleasant and blessed
music resounds, the angelic hymn, the unending symphony. This is the
outcome of our effort here; this is the fruit of our gathering.”
The
central point of this passage by St John Chrysostom is “one eucharist,
one rejoicing, one joyful choir” of angels and human beings, the
departed and the living.
The
hierarchy of the charismas and ministries of those who take part in the
Divine Liturgy can be differentiated into many degrees. There are the
catechumens, those preparing for baptism, and the faithful who have been
baptised. There are laypeople in different spiritual states, who are
being purified, illuminated and deified. There are clergy of different
orders: bishops, priests and deacons. And there are those who serve at
the Divine Liturgy in various ways, as subdeacons, readers, chanters and
helpers. They all participate in the Mystery (Sacrament) of the Divine
Liturgy, but in different ways, so there is synodality but also a
hierarchy. The laypeople take part in the Divine Liturgy by praying and
taking Holy Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ. The chanters
chant on behalf of the people. The deacons address supplications to God
for the people. The priests offer the bloodless rite, with the
permission of their bishops, and the bishops are the presidents of the
Eucharistic assembly.
Although
those present at the Divine Liturgy share in the great Mystery, and the
Clergy approach the altar and pray, it is the president of the Divine
Eucharist who offers the bloodless sacrifice and recites the Prayer of
Consecration, which is a prayer to the Father to send the Holy Spirit
and to change the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. In
this way, there is a concelebration, but particular categories of
spiritual charismas and ministries can be distinguished. Even when
clergy of the same rank concelebrate, the first of the celebrants offers
the bloodless sacrifice and the others participate in the Mystery. The
celebration of the Mystery of the Divine Eucharist presupposes someone
who takes the lead. Therefore synodality works in combination with the
hierarchical system.
This
distinction between the charismatic ministries in the Divine Liturgy is
also clear in the book of the Revelation of St John, which presents the
vision of the heavenly Church and the heavenly Divine Liturgy that St
John the Evangelist saw. As mentioned above, it is, of course, linked
with the earthly Divine Liturgy.
In this
vision of the heavenly Divine Liturgy we see “one like the Son of Man”
among the seven lampstands (Rev. 1:12ff.); the One sitting on the
throne, and the twenty-four elders sitting on thrones “around the
throne”; the four living creatures in the midst of the throne, and the
worship the twenty-four elders and the liturgical creatures offer to Him
Who sits upon the throne (Rev. 4:1ff.); the Lamb standing “as though it
had been slain” “in the midst of the throne and of the four living
creatures, and in the midst of the elders”, and their worship of this
Lamb (Rev. 5:6ff.); the altar and “under the altar the souls of those
who had been slain for the word of God” (Rev. 6:9ff.); the “great
multitude” “standing before the throne and before the Lamb” (Rev.
7:9ff.); the censer and the smoke of the incense (Rev. 8:3ff.); the song
of the redeemed (Rev. 14:1ff.); the hymn ‘Alleluia’ (Rev. 19:1ff.); the
“marriage supper of the Lamb” (Rev. 19:9ff.); the new heaven and the
new earth, and the holy city of Jerusalem (Rev. 21:1ff.).
This
entire experience of revelation is also the heavenly Liturgy and the
pattern for the earthly Divine Liturgy. There is a spiritual fragrance
about all these things. The prayers and the order of the Divine Liturgy
show a synodical and hierarchical journey and ascent to the heights of
Mount Sinai, Golgotha, and the new tomb of the Resurrection.
The Divine
Liturgy not only depicts the experience on Mount Tabor, but also
expresses it and shares in it. On Mount Tabor, Christ was in the middle,
in the uncreated Light, which was pouring forth from within, as
Christ’s Body is also a source of uncreated Light. The Prophets were on
each side of Christ, talking to Him. And the three Disciples fell on
their faces because, although they were asking to construct created
tabernacles for Christ, Moses and Elijah, they themselves were under the
uncreated tabernacle, the bright cloud, the presence of the Holy
Spirit. All these spiritual states are reminiscent of the celebration of
the Divine Liturgy.
Also,
through this revelatory experience of St John the Evangelist’s, the
earthly created church building took shape. We see the same in the case
of Moses, who constructed the tabernacle of witness on the basis of the
uncreated tabernacle not made with hands, which he saw on Mount Sinai,
and later the Temple of Solomon was constructed on the same basis, as
well as Christian churches, which are divided into the narthex, the nave
and the Holy of Holies, which is the sanctuary.
Consequently,
in the manner in which the Divine Liturgy is celebrated and the place
in which it is celebrated we see the synodical and hierarchical
structure of the ecclesiastical regime.
3. The Synodical and Hierarchal Regime at Every Level of Church Life
The Divine
Liturgy, both by the way in which it is celebrated and its ‘spirit’,
has always been the model for experiencing the whole life of the Church.
In any case, the Divine Liturgy is not an isolated part of
ecclesiastical life, but the central core and foundation of the whole
structure of the Church.
It is
characteristic that iconographers who depict the meetings of the
Ecumenical Councils use as their basis the icon of Pentecost, when the
Disciples received the Holy Spirit. This model, however, also represents
the manner in which every Divine Eucharist is concelebrated, when the
bishop’s throne is in the apse behind the altar. The Divine Eucharist,
the mystery of Pentecost, and the meetings of the Councils are
interconnected, to a relative extent.
From this
perspective, the Church’s whole administration and pastoral ministry
should function on the model of the Divine Eucharist, in other words,
synodically and hierarchically, and should be an extension of it. In any
case, any split between the sacramental and administrative life of the
Church is inconceivable. The synodical regime of the Church at the
so-called administrative and pastoral level must function in the same
way as the Divine Liturgy is celebrated, although the analogy cannot be
exact. The synodical structure of the Church and the synodical
administration of ecclesiastical affairs constitute the mystery of the
Church. There is an excellent analysis of this based on the sacred
Canons by Archimandrite George Kapsanis, Abbot of the Holy Monastery of
St Grigoriou on the Holy Mountain, in an important study of his.
The
structure of the spiritual life functions according to the theological
concept of synergy, as God acts and man co-operates. Christ brings about
deification, whereas man undergoes deification; he participates in
deification. And this happens to varying degrees.
Synodality
and the hierarchical system ought to operate in the relations between
bishops, and at meetings of the Hierarchy, as an experience and
extension of the Divine Liturgy. The Synod of Bishops is a
concelebration, an extension of the Divine Liturgy and of prayer. This
is the reason why we begin meetings of the Hierarchy by invoking the
Paraclete, and we finish its business with the words “By the prayers of
our Holy Fathers, Lord Jesus Christ our God have mercy upon us and save
us.”
At these
meetings there is the President, who is not only present and supervises
the way in which the Synod (the Hierarchy or the Standing Holy Synod)
works, but also institutes its sacred work, as also happens in the
celebration of the Divine Liturgy. There are also co-administrators or
concelebrants. The thirty-fourth Apostolic Canon requires this for the
operation of the Metropolitan system: “The bishops…must acknowledge him
who is first among them [the protos] and account him as their
head, and do nothing of consequence without his consent” in synodical
matters, although not in matters that concern particular dioceses. But
neither may he who is first, the protos, “do anything without
the consent of all.” On these conditions, “there will be unanimity, and
God will be glorified through the Lord in the Holy Spirit, the Father,
the Son and the Holy Spirit.”
This
synodical regime ought to function in the administration of the local
Holy Metropolises of the Church, and in the relations between bishops,
priests and laypeople, because laypeople are not ‘passive’ members of
the Church, but Christians with spiritual gifts who are able to share in
the uncreated grace of God, and who have the blessing of being
shepherded towards their own personal salvation.
The bishop
is the president of the Eucharistic assembly, but also the president of
the whole canonical structure of the diocese and the metropolis, as the
administration of the Church takes place within the framework of the
pastoral ministry, and this pastoral ministry is an expression of the
Eucharistic atmosphere, and is dependent on the participation of all the
members of the Church in the Mystery (Sacrament) of the Divine Liturgy.
It is in this sense that we speak about the bishop-centred regime of
the Church, which is not, however, independent of her synodical and
hierarchical regime. It is significant that the sacred Canons refer to
the manner in which we take part in the Divine Liturgy. What is more,
even the arrangement of the bishop’s throne behind the altar presupposes
that the priests stand at a lower level than the bishop’s throne,
although not on the same level as the laity, because there is a
hierarchy of charismas.
The
synodical and hierarchical structure of the ecclesiastical regime, as an
extension of the Divine Liturgy, should also function between priests
and laypeople in their parishes, as well as between abbots and monks in
monasteries. The synodical and hierarchical regime functions in all
aspects of ecclesiastical life. We should not expect to find it only in
the Synods of the Hierarchy; it should also operate in the other
expressions of Church life. It is not possible for there to be factions
and clandestine meetings in ecclesiastical life. “The Church is regarded
as a continuous synod”, as this is what the word Ekklēsia ‘Church’ means.
It is a
basic principal of ecclesiastical life that anyone who knows how to work
synodically and hierarchically as a priest in his parish and as
metropolitan in his Metropolis, is also able to work in a canonical and
synodical manner in other functions of Church life, and in the Synods of
the Church’s Hierarchy. Ecclesiological illnesses start from the way in
which the parish and the Metropolis are structured, and they also
express themselves at higher ecclesiastical levels. In any case,
carcinogenesis begins from a cell and spreads to the whole body. Anyone
who is unable to act synodically in his parish and Metropolis is also
unable to function synodically and ecclesiastically in meetings of
bishops.
From all
this it is clear that the regime of the Church is synodical and
functions hierarchically, and it is also hierarchical and functions
synodically. Synodality does not abolish the hierarchical system; nor
does the hierarchical system abolish synodality.
This is
also true of the way in which all the Orthodox Churches function, just
as it also applies to pan-Orthodox Liturgies. There is obviously a protos,
the one who is first, who is responsible for the good functioning of
the Body of the Church. Autocephaly, as I have stressed in another
article of mine, does not mean ‘autocephalarchy’ (independence). In any
case, Christ is the head of the Church, and even the term ‘autocephaly’
(which literally means ‘being its own head’) cannot be understood in an
absolute sense. Rather, this term denotes the self-administration of
some regions, and not their full independence.
In the Orthodox Church there is a protos,
who co-exists hierarchically with the other primates. Essentially, all
the bishops are equal among themselves, since they all have the
high-priesthood of Christ. However, according to the canonical system of
ecclesiastical administration, they are not all equal in honour, and
this is understood in accordance with their administrative and
Eucharistic position within the Church. But that is the subject of
another article of mine.