Orthodox Church, The

OrTHODOX CHUrCH, THE, a communion of Churches with the most numerous membership among the Eastern Churches. A gradual process of separation, which included the reciprocal excommunications of 1054, led to the schism between the Byzantine East and the Latin West and the establishment of distinct Catholic and Orthodox Churches. Today, the Orthodox are a communion of Churches, concentrated in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, which share the same faith, sacraments, and Byzantine spiritual, canonical, theological and liturgical tradition. The Orthodox accept as normative the first seven ecumenical councils (*Seven Councils, Church of the) for doctrine and Church life, along with some later local councils that expressed the same faith. Admittedly, there still persists an official preference for (medieval) liturgical languages such as Greek or Church Slavonic. But the liturgical use of the vernacular has been equally acceptable in various local Churches since the 9th century missions of Sts *Cyril and *Methodius. Structures and conciliarity. Although Orthodox Christians consider themselves to be one Church in the theological sense, at the administrative level, Orthodoxy is a communion of independent or ‘autocephalous’ Churches, all of which recognize the *patriarch of Constantinople as primus inter pares, or ‘first among equals’ Although he does not have authority to intervene in the affairs of local Churches outside his own patriarchate, he is considered first in honour and the symbolic centre of all the Orthodox Churches. Thus the patriarchate of Constantinople (also known as the *Ecumenical Patriarchate) enjoys a certain priority among the various Orthodox Churches. Many of the Churches are located in the former Ottoman Empire. The Russian (subsequent Soviet) Empire contained the largest of them all. Today there are fourteen Orthodox Churches that are generally accepted as autocephalous (Gr. autē kephalē: ‘self-headed’)

An autocephalous Church possesses the right to resolve all internal problems on its own authority and the ability to choose its own bishops, including the patriarch, archbishop (as in the Church of Cyprus and in that of Greece) or *metropolitan who heads the Church. While each autocephalous Church acts independently, they all remain in full sacramental and canonical communion with one another. Today these autocephalous Orthodox Churches include the four ancient Eastern patriarchates (*Constantinople, *Alexandria, *Antioch and *Jerusalem), and ten other Orthodox Churches that have emerged over the centuries in Russia (*Russian Orthodox Church), Serbia (*Serbian Orthodox Church), Romania (*Romanian Orthodox Church), Bulgaria (*Bulgarian Orthodox Church), Georgia (*Georgian Orthodox Church), Cyprus (*Cyprus, Orthodox Church of), Greece (*Greece, Orthodox Church of), Poland (*Polish Orthodox Church), Albania (*Albania, Church in) and the Czech and Slovak Republics (*Czech and Slovak Republics, Orthodox Church in) On its own initiative, the Patriarchate of Moscow has granted autocephalous status to most of its parishes in North America under the name of the *Orthodox Church in America. But since the Patriarchate of Constantinople claims the exclusive right to grant autocephalous status, it and most other Orthodox Churches do not recognize the autocephaly of the American Church. Nine of these autocephalous Churches are Patriarchates: Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Russia, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria and Georgia. The others are headed by an archbishop or metropolitan. All of these Churches would acknowledge a potential primacy for the see of Rome, although never one of universal jurisdiction. Least of all would any one of them welcome an *ecclesiology which involved acceptance of papal infallibility. Instead, the Orthodox adhere to conciliar principles and practice.

This goes further than the determination of dogma by Church *councils. Although an ecumenical or universal council is believed to have preeminent authority in the Church (and no more than the first seven general councils of the undivided Church are recognized as ecumenical; *Seven Councils, Church of the), each such council has to be received by the Church as a whole. hence the well-known formulation of the eastern patriarchs in their letter to Pope *Pius IX in 1848: ‘The defender of religion is the very body of the Church, that is to say the people itself’ Aware of this teaching, the Russian lay theologian Aleksej *Khomjakov (d. 1860), elaborated an ecclesiology on the subject of conciliarity. A new word, *sobornost’, was coined to accommodate this teaching, which was widely accepted in Russian Church circles. Conciliarity undergirds relationships between the various patriarchates, and the most senior of the patriarchs (Constantinople) claims to be no more than the first among equals. The same can be said of individual patriarchs in respect of their own hierarchy, for a patriarch is never more than a senior bishop. Most necessary of all is the exercise of conciliarity at the diocesan level, for the diocese is the fundamental unit in the Church’s structure. Of course it has its administrative function, but that which truly acts as its bond and its ferment is the bishop’s celebration of the Eucharist in its midst. This is never a private celebration, nor is it repeated in the course of any one day, for its function is to unite the episcopate, the priesthood and the people in a single offering, concelebration and communion. Religious practice.

Communion has always been offered under both species, and the faithful realize that they receive bread and wine which has been truly changed (the Greek term is metabolē) into the Body and Blood of the Saviour. however, the awe engendered by this realization tends to encourage rather rare communions. The requirement of the Russian Church that confession should precede communion has the same effect. By contrast, those who have not made their first confession – children under the age of seven, including infants – are the most frequent communicants of all. The Eucharist is invariably a solemn (often a protracted) celebration. It takes the form of a dialogue between the celebrant and people, in which the people’s part is sung. When the people are silent (a choir may represent them), they take the opportunity for interior prayer. Their participation is marked by making the sign of the cross or by occasional prostrations. Such prostrations are more easily done because most Orthodox church buildings offer the laity an open space in which to worship without the constraint of pews. This engenders a lively sense of community, since worshippers stand comfortably with one another to pray. Nor does the Eucharist provide them with their only opportunity for public prayer. Over the centuries, there has been a rich elaboration of daily, weekly and seasonal cycles of prayer (*Liturgical Year) Indeed, the manner and the matter of worship have remained remarkably constant since the Middle Ages. An important influence in developing the liturgical patterns of the Orthodox world has been *monasticism. Indeed, only the time-table and dedication of the monastics would allow the celebration of the Church’s services in all their fulness. The average parish approximates to this fulness only in Great Lent (*Tesserakoste) Yet there is little talk of liturgical reforms.

It is also during Great Lent that non-monastics are encouraged to participate in fasts (*Fasting) There are in addition, three lenten periods. To these are added two days of abstinence per week, Wednesdays and Fridays. Great Lent can be quite rigorous in its demands (abstention from all products of animal origin, including dairy foods), hence the modified acceptance of the rules by many Church members. Yet the principle which underlies such practices is not thereby challenged or discounted. Nor is there any question of waiving the pre-communion fast (*Fasting, Eucharistic) This involves abstention from all food and drink at least from the preceding midnight. Spirit and Worship. The human body is therefore involved in worship. Both in private and in public prayer the senses are engaged. Icons (*Icon) and relics are kissed. Incense is savoured. holy water is drunk. Various kinds of plainsong delight the ear. In general, the Church celebrates and confirms the sanctification of matter. Yet the inner core of worship lies beyond that which is heard or seen or sensed. There is always the need for prayer ‘in secret’ (Mt 6:6) Most secret, since usually internalized and silent, is a prayer which has flourished since the early Middle Ages in the monastic world. It is known as the *Jesus Prayer, and it involves the continual use of the invocation, ‘Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, be merciful to me, a sinner’ The publican, whose words are echoed in this prayer (Lk 18:13) served an alien state administration, and the Orthodox Church of the present day finds itself in a similar position. With the exception of the Finnish Orthodox Church and Orthodox Churches such as the Church of Greece which are described in the Constitution as being the ‘prevalent’ Church, the countries which followed Constantine no longer exist.

Images of the Byzantine or the Russian Empire can only feed nostalgic and never-to-be realized dreams. Indeed, the 20th century saw a reversion to pre-constantinian norms. The Communist assault on religion, which in the case of Russia lasted almost three quarters of a century, has left a residue of inhibitions. These are often detrimental to the Church’s vision of its role, and therefore to its outreach. In the process, Orthodox participation in the ecumenical movement has been seriously affected. The very independence of the various patriarchates works against the formulation of a common policy of its embodiment in practice. The Patriarchate of Constantinople started its support of ecumenical endeavours relatively early (1904 and 1920), and it continues with its steadfast efforts in this field. By contrast, Moscow has withdrawn into a defensive position vis-à-vis the ‘West’, while Jerusalem has formally abandoned ecumenism altogether. In this, as in other matters, the Church bureaucracy has its say and makes its mark. Meanwhile, a ‘great and holy council’ of the Orthodox Church has been in preparation for some time, at which ‘the very body of the Church’ should be given its opportunity to enrich and to reveal the Church’s mind. It is not expected to have anything like the impact of *Vatican II. But then Vatican II was hardly expected to have as much impact as it did. J. Erickson, ‘Autocephaly in Orthodox Canonical Literature to the Thirteenth Century’, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 15 (1971) 28–41; Maloney; A. Schmemann, The Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy, Crestwood NY 1977; J. Meyendorff, Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes, New York 19832; J. M.

hussey, The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire, Oxford 1986; S. Bulgakov, The Orthodox Church, Crestwood NY 1988; T. Ware, The Orthodox Church, London 19932; E. Morini, La Chiesa Ortodossa: Storia – Disciplina – Culto, Bologna 1996; J. Binns, An Introduction to the Christian Orthodox Churches, Cambridge, 2002; G. A. Maloney et al., ‘Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches’, NCE2 10:679–681; Casiday; T. Bremer, ‘Between Admiration and Refusal: Roman Catholic Perception of Orthodoxy’, J. A. Lis, ‘Anti-Western ORTHODOXIA Theology in Greece and Serbia Today’, Eastern Orthodox Encounters of Identity and Otherness: Values, Self-Reflection and Otherness, A. Krawchuk, T. Bremer (eds.), New York 2014, 81–94, 159–168. †S. hackel, A. Casiday.

切換側邊欄Magisterium AIMagisterium AI

Magisterium AI

登入以獲取更多用量和功能

Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Christian East

Magisterium AI
Magisterium AI