Unity Faith and Order - Dialogues - Anglican Orthodox
Also available as a PDF
Preface by the Co-Chairmen
Introduction: Anglican-Orthodox Dialogue 1976-1984
The Agreed Statement
Method and Approach
I The Mystery of the Church
Approaches to the Mystery
The Marks of the Church
Communion and Intercommunion
Wider Leadership within the Church
Witness, Evangelism, and Service
II Faith in the Trinity, Prayer and Holiness
Participation in the Grace of the Holy Trinity
III Worship and Tradition
Paradosis - Tradition
Worship and the Maintenance of the Faith
The Communion of Saints and the Departed
1 The Moscow Agreed Statement 1976
2 The Athens Report 1978
3 List of Participants
4 List of Papers by Members of the Commission
ACC Anglican Consultative Council
AOJDD Anglican-Orthodox Joint Doctrinal Discussions
ARC1C Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission
ECNL Eastern Churches Newsletter
PC Migne, J.-P., Patrologia Graeca
PL Migne, J.-P., Patrologia Latina
It was Archbishop Basil of Brussels, one of the most revered Orthodox
members of the Anglican-Orthodox Joint Doctrinal Commission, who remarked
that the aim of our Dialogue is that we may eventually be visibly united
in one Church. We offer this Report in the conviction that although this
goal may presently seem to be far from being achieved, it is nevertheless
one towards which God the Holy Spirit is insistently beckoning us. Those
who have served on the Commission at every stage since its inception in
1966, and since our own Co-Chairmanship began in 1980, have been aware
that this is the case, although we may sometimes have been tempted to think
otherwise. Not only is there a long-standing friendship between the Anglican
Communion and the Orthodox Churches but we have not been allowed to forget
that the continuation of such friendship is both costly and demanding.
As those who read this document will see, we have been studying for
eight years some of the basic aspects of our Holy Faith. As bishops, clergy
and lay theologians representing our Churches in many parts of the world
we have not hesitated to voice our differences as well as our agreements.
There are still more to be faced. Yet, as we debate together, and above
all as we celebrate the Holy Liturgy and other services daily during the
week-long meetings according to the Rites of our Churches, we are convinced
that we are being slowly but surely moulded by the Spirit into the patterns
of love and understanding which, when God knows we are ready for it, will
eventually lead to visible unity.
Such experiences do not achieve their true end unless they are shared
with the bishops, clergy and faithful people of our respective Churches.
We hope that this
new Agreed Statement completed in Dublin will provide a fresh opportunity
for many Anglicans and Orthodox to study our faith together. For while
we press on in the work of our Commission we are equally anxious to do
all we can to encourage visits among the bishops of our Churches-, and
also the participation of synodical, diocesan and parish gatherings, wherever
our Churches live side by side, in the exciting tasks of rediscovering
one another in Christ; of sharing in the richness of each other's traditions;
and, as we recognize the poverty caused by our long separations, together
serving others in the Name of the One who prayed to his Father:
I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through
their word, that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me,
and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe
that thou hast sent me. (John 17.20-1).
+ Henry Hill +Methodios of Thyateira and Great Britain
Dublin, 19 August 1984
Anglican-Orthodox Dialogue 1976-84
As a result of the talks in 1962 between the Archbishop of Canterbury,
Dr Michael Ramsey, and the Ecumenical Patriarch, Athenagoras I of Constantinople,
the Primates of the Anglican Communion were approached and agreed unanimously
to the setting up of an Anglican Theological Commission to confer with
theologians of the Orthodox Churches. In 1964 the Third Pan-Orthodox Conference
at Rhodes unanimously decided officially to resume dialogue with the Anglican
Communion, and this was ratified by all the Orthodox Churches. After a
preparatory phase (1966-72) in which the Anglican and Orthodox Commissions
met separately, the first series of joint conversations took place (1973-6)
and resulted in the production of the Moscow Agreed Statement on the Knowledge
of God, the Inspiration and Authority of Holy Scripture, Scripture and
Tradition, the Authority of the Councils, the Filioque Clause,
the Church as the Eucharistic Community, and the Invocation of the Holy
Spirit in the Eucharist.1
2 From Moscow to Lambeth (1976-8)
The Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I described Archbishop Michael
Ramsey's 1962 visit to Constantinople as 'the beginning of a new spiritual
spring that may lead to greater rapprochement and the closer collaboration
of all churches'.2 During his visit to the Ecumenical Patriarch Demetrios
I in 1982 Archbishop Robert Runcie of Canterbury referred to that earlier
remark and then spoke of the first series of Anglican - Orthodox conversations
as a 'spiritual summer' with the Moscow Agreed Statement as its 'first-fruits'.
He next went on to speak of a 'wintry season' of difficulties experienced
in Anglican-Orthodox relations.3 For when the Anglican-Orthodox Joint Doctrinal
Commission met at Cambridge in 1977 to study the subjects agreed at the
conclusion of the Moscow Conference (1. The Church and the Churches; 2.
The Communion of Saints and the departed; 3. Ministry and priesthood),4
a 'thunderstorm' broke out presaging the onset of 'winter'. For the Orthodox
members 'realised with regret' that the ordination of women was 'no longer
simply a question for discussion but an actual event in the life of some
of the Anglican churches' and asked themselves 'how it will be possible
to continue the dialogue, and what meaning the dialogue will have in these
circumstances'.5 It was therefore agreed that the 1978 meeting would take
place 'before the Lambeth Conference, in order, by expounding the Orthodox
position, to enable their Anglican brethren to come to what, in their view,
would be a proper appreciation of the matter. For the Orthodox the future
of the Dialogue would depend on the resolutions of the Lambeth Conference.'6
In February 1978 the Bishop of St Albans told the General Synod of the
Church of England that 'the future as well as the character of these valuable
doctrinal discussions now hangs in the balance'.
The main part of the 1978 Conference at Moni Pendeli, Athens, was devoted
to setting out the Orthodox and Anglican positions on the Ordination of
Women to the Priesthood. In its report the Orthodox members said: 'We see
the ordination of women, not as part of the creative continuity of tradition,
but as a violation of the apostolic faith and order of the Church . . .
This will have a decisively negative effect on the issue of the recognition
of Anglican orders ... By ordaining women
Anglicans would sever themselves from continuity in apostolic faith and
spiritual life.' They added: 'It is obvious that, if the dialogue continues,
its character would be drastically changed.' The joint conclusions to the
report stated: 'We value our Dialogue together and we are encouraged that
our Churches and their leaders, as well as the members of our Commission,
hope that it may continue under conditions acceptable to both sides.'7
Following the 1978 Lambeth Conference's Resolution 21 on the ordination
of women,8 the Orthodox Co-Chairman of AOJDD, Archbishop Athenagoras, expressed
his view that 'the theological dialogue will continue, although now simply
as an academic and informative exercise, and no longer as an ecclesial
endeavour aiming at the union of the two churches'. He later recommended
that Orthodox professors rather than bishops should take part in the dialogue
as an indication of its changed status and purpose. Some Orthodox agreed
with this. However, as the Bishop of St Albans discovered during his visits
to the Orthodox Churches in the spring of 1979, other Orthodox felt there
was no need to change the standing of the talks and wished the dialogue
to be resumed in order, as the Lambeth Conference 1978 Resolution 35:2
put it, 'to explore the fundamental questions of doctrinal agreement and
disagreement in our Churches'.9 This view prevailed, and in July 1979 the
Steering Committee of AOJDD met and agreed that the Full Commission should
continue its work in July 1980. 'The ultimate aim remains the unity of
the Churches', it affirmed. But 'the method may need to change in order
to emphasise the pastoral and practical dimensions of the subjects of theological
discussions'. It concluded: 'Our conversations are concerned with the search
for a unity in faith. They are not negotiations for immediate full communion.
When this is understood the discovery of differences on various matters,
though distressing, will be seen as a necessary step on the long road toward
that unity which God wills for His Church.'
3. From Llandaff to Dublin (1980-4)
During his visit to the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople in 1982,
the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Robert Runcie, 'spoke with gratitude of
His All-Holiness' encouragement to continue the dialogue particularly when
facing difficulties, which had led to the "second spring" which
these official conversations were now experiencing'.10 The Commission resumed
its work at St Michael's College, Llandaff, in July 1980, and welcomed
as its new Co-Chairmen Bishop Henry Hill of Ontario, Canada (following
the appointment of the Bishop of St Albans as Archbishop of Canterbury)
and Archbishop Methodios of Thyateira and Great Britain (following the
death of his predecessor Archbishop Athenagoras). The Commission approved
a report on 'The Communion of Saints and the Departed', and continued work
on 'The Church and the Churches' and on the Filioque clause in
the Creed. This was continued and extended at subsequent meetings at the
Orthodox Patriarchal Centre at Chambesy in Geneva 1981, and at Canterbury
in 1982 where the first sub-commission focused on 'The Mystery of the Church',
the second sub-commission on 'Participation in the Grace of the Holy Trinity
and Christian Holiness', and the third sub-commission on 'Tradition, Christian
Worship, and the Maintenance of the Christian Faith'. At the Commission's
meeting at Odessa in the Soviet Union in 1983, particular attention was
given to new material on Primacy (Seniority); Witness, Evangelism, and
Service-, and on Prayer, Icons, and Family Devotion,
and discussion of the topics already on the agenda was continued. The 1984
meeting at Bellinter near Dublin has had the task of finalizing an agreed
Report and Statement on 'The Mystery of the Church', 'Faith in the Trinity,
Prayer and Holiness', and on 'Worship and Tradition'.
After the difficulties of the fairly recent past, the Anglican-Orthodox
Joint Doctrinal Commission has re-established itself and has now developed
a productive and satisfactory way of working. There is a freshness and
liveliness brought into the Commission by the presence of so many new members
both Anglican and Orthodox, as well as much valued continuity and a wealth
of experience provided by its older and longer-serving members. There is
a prayerfulness which permeates its whole work, and which has brought the
Commission to a new stage of fellowship in Christ. Also, some of the pressures
of the past have gone. We are not required to solve outstanding problems
(such as the ordination of women) as a condition of continuing the dialogue.
Nor are we trying to produce too quickly materials that might be used as
the basis for early decisions to enter a new stage of relationships between
our Churches. Instead, the Commission is more free to explore together
and understand better the faith we hold and the ways in which we express
it. It is also noteworthy that far more consideration has been given to
prayer and spirituality than is usual in inter-church encounters of this
type. If we accept that Anglican-Orthodox Dialogue is still in the first stage
of exploring each other's faith and seeking co-operation in mission and
service,11 then it can perhaps be seen that much good work is being done
by this particular bilateral conversation to help bridge the ancient divide
between Eastern and Western Churches.
During the Archbishop of Canterbury's visit to Constantinople in 1982,
Archbishop Methodios of Thyateira and Great Britain, the Orthodox Co-Chairman
of the Joint Doctrinal Commission, said: 'There is positive progress towards
the first stage of common prayer and co-operation.'
Members of the Commission are convinced, as an Anglican Consultative
Council report has said, that their work contributes greatly to 'the mission
and peace of the Churches after the ancient division of East and West',
and to the Church's ministry of reconciliation and peace 'in the midst
of world political tensions and their resulting pressures'.12
International Anglican-Orthodox Dialogue both draws from and seeks to
promote local Anglican-Orthodox dialogue, remembering that the latter's
task is not to duplicate but to make known International Agreements and
to develop relationships between the people of the two Churches.
Anglican-Orthodox discussions take place in the context of Anglican-Roman
Catholic, Orthodox-Roman Catholic and other bilateral and multilateral
conversations. Each draws from and contributes to the other. We are convinced
that our discussions have a further part to play in East-West relations,
in inter-church relations and in theological explorations from which we
- Published with introductory and supporting material in Anglican-Orthodox
Dialogue: The Moscow Agreed Statement, ed. K. Ware and C. Davey (SPCK
1977), reproduced in Appendix I below.
- Colin Davey, 'Anglican-Orthodox Relations during the Patriarchate of
His All-Holiness Athenagoras I (1948-72)' in Athenagoras, the Epirote
Ecumenical Patriarch (loannina 1976), p. 417.
- Communique 1 August 1982 para. 4. Episkepsis No. 278 (1.9.1982),
- Anglican-Orthodox Dialogue, p. 78.
- Communique from Cambridge Conference.
- Report of the Athens meeting paras. Ill 4, 5, 6; V.
- The Report of the Lambeth Conference 1978, pp. 45-7.
- ibid., p. 51.
- Communique para. 4. Episkepsis No. 278 (1.9.1982), p. 2.
- See Anglican Consultative Council 1982 Consultation: Unity by
Stages, Section HI (a).
- Steps towards Unity, Report
of the ACC Preparatory Group on Ecumenical Affairs, Woking, February
1984, p. 14.
The Agreed Statement
Method and Approach
- In our discussions since the adoption of the Moscow Agreed Statement,
and especially during the last four years, our Joint Commission has endeavoured
to keep constantly in mind the essential link that exists between theology
and sanctification through prayer, between doctrine and the daily life
of the Christian community. Keenly aware how dangerous it is to discuss
the Christian faith in an abstract manner, we have sought always to understand
how theological principles are expressed in the living experience of the
people of God.
I The Mystery of the Church
Approaches to the Mystery
- We live in a deeply divided world. We are aware that Christian disunity,
as well as being contrary to the will of God and a sin against the very
nature of the Church, has often contributed towards the divisions of the
world. We know that the Church is entrusted with a message of reconciliation.
This drives us to seek unity amongst ourselves, in order to contribute
to the healing of the divisions of humankind, as well as to stand together
as Christians who face difficulties and pressures, and who witness to Christ's
truth in a hostile or indifferent world. We know the temptation for Christian
communities to avoid this challenge. But Christ has poured out his Spirit
on his people, to transform them 'into his likeness from one degree of
glory to another' (2 Cor. 3.18), and to incorporate them in his mission
of love and reconciliation to the world (2 Cor. 5.18; John 20.21).
- The mystery of the Church cannot be defined or fully described. But
the steadfast joy of people who discover new life and salvation in Christ
through the Church reminds us that the Church itself is a lived experience.
The Church is sent into the world as a sign, instrument and first-fruits
of the Kingdom of God. The New Testament speaks about it primarily in images,
such as the following:
- (a) The Church is 'the body of Christ' (1 Cor. 12.27). The
head is Christ (Eph. 1.22; Col. 1.18), and his members are those who in
faith respond to the gospel (Rom. 10.17), are baptized in the name of the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28.19), and are united with
Christ and with each other through participation in the Eucharist (1 Cor.
10.16-17). Through this union they are being conformed to his true humanity,
filled with his divinity, and made 'partakers of the divine nature' (2
Pet. 1.4) (Οεωσις). In its totality the Church incorporates both living
and departed in the communion of the saints.
- (b) The Church is the messianic gathering, the gathering in
Christ of all nations into the people of God (Matt. 8.11; Gal, 3.8), and,
as the new Israel, completes the special sign of God's grace given in the
election of the ancient people of Israel as God's chosen and beloved (Gal.
3.8; Rev. 21.2-3).
- (c) The Church is the holy temple of God, indwelt by his Spirit (1
Cor. 3.16, Eph. 2.22). It is a spiritual house, a royal priesthood appointed
to declare to the world the wonderful deeds of him who called them out
of darkness into light (1 Pet. 2.5-9).
- (d) The New Testament also speaks of the Church as Christ's bride,
whom he presents to himself 'without spot or wrinkle or any such thing'
(Eph. 5.27; cf. 2 Cor. 11.2). In this connection Scripture looks forward
to the consummation of history as 'the marriage of the Lamb', when the
bride will be prepared to meet her bridegroom in glory (Rev. 19.6-8).
The Marks of the Church
- In the Creed we proclaim the Church to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic.
(a) The Church is one, because there is a 'one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
one God and Father of us all' (Eph. 4.5), and it participates in the life
of the Holy Trinity, one God in three persons. The unity of the Church
is expressed in common faith and in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit;
it takes concrete and visible form as the Church, gathered round the bishop
in the common celebration of the Holy Eucharist, proclaims Christ's death
till he comes (1 Cor. 11.26). The unity of Christians with Christ in baptism
is a unity of love and mutual respect which transcends all human division,
of race, social status and sex (Gal. 3.28). This unity in Christ is God's
gift to the world by which men and women may learn to live in unity with
one another, accepting one another as Christ has accepted them.
- Nevertheless, we find ourselves in an abnormal situation. We are a
disrupted Christian people seeking to restore our unity. Our divisions
do not destroy but they damage the basic unity we have in Christ, and our
disunity impedes our mission to the world as well as our relationships
with each other. Anglicans are accustomed to seeing our divisions as within
the Church: they do not believe that they alone are the one true Church,
but they believe that they belong to it. Orthodox, however, believe that
the Orthodox Church is the one true Church of Christ, which as his Body
is not and cannot be divided. But at the same time they see Anglicans as
brothers and sisters in Christ who are seeking with them the union of all
Christians in the one Church.
- (b)The Church is holy (1 Cor. 3.17) because its members are in Christ,
the head, who is holy and who lives in them (Eph. 3.17). The Church's holiness
can be obscured but cannot be destroyed by the sins of its members. Christ's
holiness is shown, not in drawing apart from outcasts and sinners but in
calling them (Mark 2.15-17), and most fully in his becoming sin for us
in order to deliver us from sin (2 Cor. 5.21). For through his life, death
and resurrection he overcomes, redeems and sanctifies the world, and by
his justifying grace transforms forgiven sinners into 'a holy people' (1
Pet. 2.9). The Church's holiness springs from the action of God's Holy
Spirit whom Christ sends to purify his people, to draw them into the reality
of his risen life, and to conform them to his compassion and love for the
- The pursuit of holiness challenges the world and may bring Christians
into conflict with it, as they carry on Christ's spiritual warfare with
the powers of evil. In this they are following the saints of the Church
who have shared in Christ's rejection and sufferings (Col. 1.24), 'in honour
and dishonour, in ill repute and good repute' (2 Cor. 6.8).
- (c) The Church is catholic because by word and life it maintains
and bears witness to the fullness of the faith, and because people of all
nations and conditions are called to participate in it. Catholicity stands
in contrast to schism and heresy. If Christians cease to love each other
or to respect church order they are in danger of schism. If they depart
from the essentials of the apostolic faith they become guilty of heresy.
The catholicity of the Church is shown in the multiplicity of particular
local churches, each of which, being in eucharis-tic communion with all
the other local churches, manifests in its own place and time the one catholic
Church. These local churches, in faithful response to their own particular
missionary situation, have developed a wide diversity in their life. As
long as their witness to the one faith remains unimpaired, such diversity
is to be seen, not as a deficiency or cause for division, but as a mark
of the fullness of the one Spirit who distributes to each according to
his will (1 Cor. 12.11).
- At each local Eucharist, celebrated within the catholic Church, Christ
is present in his wholeness, and so each local celebration actualizes and
gives visible expression to the Church's catholicity.1 Communion in the
Eucharist is also the outward manifestation of the common faith and the
Christian love which binds together all the local churches in the one catholic
Church. Their communion is likewise expressed in the constant contact and
communication between the bishops and members of different local churches
through meetings in council, exchange of letters, mutual visits, and prayer
for each other.
- (d) The Church is apostolic because it is built on the foundation
of the apostles (Eph. 2.20; Rev. 21.14) who are the primary and authoritative
witnesses to the crucified and risen Lord. Their authority lies in the
fact that they were sent by Jesus Christ, who was himself sent by the Father
(Matt. 28.19-20; John 20.21). Christ gave them the Holy Spirit, who maintains
the apostolic word as a living force within the Church, evoking faith and
discipleship. The Church's apostolicity is manifested chiefly in three
- (i) The Church maintains the apostolic tradition by its preaching and
teaching and by a constantly renewed understanding and living of Scripture.
By critical discernment it rejects inauthentic ways of thought and life.2
- (ii) The Church in each generation participates in the apostolic mission
to the world. The Church is 'not of the world' (John 17.14), but it is
in, with and for human society. Its mission is to save and transform society
by the power of the Holy Spirit. This mission includes preaching, teaching,
worship, diakonia, testimony against injustice; also the hidden life of
prayer, and martyrdom.
- (iii) The apostolicity of the Church is manifested in a particular
way through the succession of bishops. This succession is a sign of the
unbroken continuity of apostolic tradition and life. Through prayer and
the laying on of hands, the bishop receives the Holy Spirit, who bestows
on him a charisma giving him the grace and responsibility to uphold
and testify to the authority of the apostolic word (2 Tim. 1.6). The local
bishop can only perform his ministry: (1) in unity with his brother bishops,
especially when meeting synodically; (2) in unity with his flock, both
clergy and laity. In exercising the ministry of oversight he should pay
heed to the prophetic and other gifts which Christ gives his people (Rom.
12.6-8; Eph. 4.11-12).
Communion and Intercommunion
- (a) The several Provinces of the Anglican Communion have their own
synodical regulations governing eucharistic hospitality and relationships
of reciprocal intercommunion and Full Communion with other churches. There
are some instances where the pastoral concern for individuals is uppermost.
There are others where there have been specific joint Declarations of Intent
to work together locally or nationally to seek unity (such as that between
members of Local Ecumenical Projects in England or between Anglicans, Methodists,
Presbyterians, and Congregationalists in South Africa). There are still
others where unity of faith, ministry and sacraments is accompanied by
growth in conciliarity and common mission. From all of these it is clear
that there has been a considerable development in ecumenical and inter-church
relations in recent years, which has resulted in Anglicans sharing in the
Eucharist with members of other churches on special ecumenical occasions,
in times of special need, or on a more regular basis.
- Anglicans have come to recognize different stages in which churches
stand in a progressively closer relationship to each other, with a corresponding
and consequent degree of eucharistic sharing which is viewed as both 'a
proper manifestation of such unity in Christ as they already share' and
as 'creative of even greater unity'.3 However, 'for a Church officially
to authorise Intercommunion (whether "Reciprocal" or "Limited")
as a means to unity, or for an individual to practise it, where
there is already some agreement in faith and commitment to unity, is not
to deny that a more complete expression, such as Full Communion or Organic
Union, is also a goal to be sought'.4
- (b) For the Orthodox, 'communion' involves a mystical and
sanctifying unity created by the Body and Blood of Christ, which makes
them 'one body and one blood (σúσσωμoi καî σúναiμoi) with Christ',5
and therefore they can have no differences of faith. There can be 'communion'
only between local churches which have a unity of faith, ministry, and
sacraments. For this reason the concept of 'Intercommunion' has no place
in Orthodox ecclesiology.
Wider Leadership within the Church
- (a) Throughout the history of the Church, from the New Testament
onwards, there can be seen varying patterns of wider leadership. Anglicans
often refer to these as levels of 'primacy', whereas Orthodox generally
prefer to speak about an order of 'seniority' (xxxxxxxx). Despite differences
in the outward forms in which this wider leadership is expressed, there
is fundamental agreement between the way in which Anglicans understand
'primacy' and the way in which Orthodox understand 'seniority'.
- (b) In the New Testament there are certain persons within
the Church who are vested with special authority, such as Peter, Paul,
James and John, but none of these acts in isolation. The entire New Testament
points to the independence or autonomy of local churches, which live together
in unity, yet with no single church possessing permanent pre-eminence.
Following the adoption of Christianity as the official religion of the
Roman Empire, an order of seniority became established, involving five
great sees in the following sequence: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria,
Antioch, Jerusalem (see the canons of the Ecumenical Councils, especially
Canon 2 of Constantinople  and Canon 28 of Chalcedon  ). Both
the apostolic foundation of sees and the civil status of cities as centres
of communication influenced the development of this order of seniority.
- (c) This wider leadership, whether described as 'seniority'
or 'primacy', is to be understood in terms not of coercion but of pastoral
service. Jesus warned his apostles, both by word and by example, to exercise
their authority not by lording it over the flock but by being servants
of all (Mark 10.42-5; John 13.12-17); and the same warning was repeated
to those who succeeded the apostles in the oversight of the Church (1 Pet.
5.1-4). Since in practice this teaching has often been forgotten, it is
good that the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission has called
attention to it, noting that 'truly to lead is to serve and not to dominate
others', and that the bishop has his authority in order to serve his flock
as its shepherd'.6 This is to be kept in mind whenever the word 'honour'
is applied to a bishop, as in the phrase 'seniority of honour' (xxxxx xxx
- (d) Wider leadership exists at various levels:
first the seniority of the bishop who presides over a group of diocesan
bishops. Such seniority is held in modern Orthodox practice by the patriarch
within each patriarchate, or by the presiding archbishop or metropolitan
within each autocephalous or autonomous Church; in Anglican practice, by
the archbishop or presiding bishop within each province of the Anglican
(ii) Secondly, there exist various different forms of seniority
on the universal level, such as that of the Pope within the Roman Catholic
Church (and throughout the whole Christian Church prior to the schism);
that of the Ecumenical Patriarch within the Orthodox Church; and that of
the Archbishop of Canterbury within the worldwide Anglican Communion.
- 25 (e) It is the purpose of wider leadership to strengthen
unity and to give brotherly help to the bishops of the local churches in
the exercise of their common ministry which exists to safeguard scriptural
truth whenever it is threatened, to promote right teaching and living,
and to further the Church's mission to the world. This the bishop who has
seniority does chiefly in two ways:
But the bishop who has seniority does not
have the right to intervene arbitrarily in the affairs of a diocese other
than his own.7
- He encourages Christian fellowship and collaboration by initiating
procedures which will lead to the summoning of a council or synod, and
presiding over it.
- In certain situations, when appeals are made to him from the decisions
of a diocesan bishop or a group of bishops, he initiates procedures whereby
these decisions may be reviewed.
- (f) In exercising his ministry the bishop who has seniority should
respect the proper authority and freedom of each diocese or local church.
He should always act in collegiality with his brother bishops; equally
he should take account of the gifts of understanding and discernment entrusted
to the whole people of God, clergy and laity together.
- (g) The Ecumenical Councils ascribe a position of special
seniority, within the wider leadership of the universal Church, not only
to the See of Rome but also to that of Constantinople; and this fact needs
to be taken into account in any Christian reunion.8 The ecumenical Patriarch
does not, however, claim universal jurisdiction over the other Churches,
such as is ascribed to the Pope by the First and also the Second Vatican
Council; and Orthodox see any such claim as contrary to the meaning of
seniority, as this was understood in the early centuries of the Church.
- The Anglican Churches of the British Isles, since their separation
from the See of Rome, have developed into an international communion; and
within this communion a position of seniority has come to be ascribed to
the ancient See of Canterbury. But this seniority is understood as a ministry
of service and support to the other Anglican Churches, not as a form of
domination over them; and, like the Ecumenical Patriarch, the Archbishop
of Canterbury makes no claim to a primacy of universal jurisdiction. Thus,
even though the seniority ascribed to the Archbishop of Canterbury is not
identical with that given to the Ecumenical Patriarch, the Anglican Communion
has developed on the Orthodox rather than the Roman Catholic pattern, as
a fellowship of self-governing national or regional Churches.
- (h) According to Roman Catholic teaching the primacy
of the Pope is closely linked to his infallibility. Both Orthodox and Anglicans
consider that infallibility is not the property of any particular person
within the Church.9 It is significant that the Anglican-Roman Catholic
International Commission has stated clearly: 'This is a term applicable
unconditionally only to God, and ... to use it of a human being, even in
highly restricted circumstances, can produce many misunderstandings'.10
- Anglicans and Orthodox are both firmly convinced that the Holy Spirit
will guide the Church into all truth and 'the powers of death shall not
prevail against it' (Matt. 16.18). We believe that all bishops are empowered
by the Holy Spirit to bear witness to the truth; but if the doctrine of
infallibility means that it is possible to guarantee by external criteria
that certain statements of a particular bishop are safeguarded from error,
we cannot accept this. Equally no such guarantee can be given concerning
the statements of an episcopal assembly, since the ecumenicity of a council
is manifested through its acceptance by the body of the Church.
Witness, Evangelism and Service
- God bears witness to himself by his revelation in creation (Rom. 1.19-20;
Acts 14.17), through the patriarchs and prophets and finally through his
Son Jesus Christ (Heb. 1.1-2), who is 'the faithful and true witness' (Rev.
3.14). Christ is also the true Servant, who turned upside down our ideas
of leadership by becoming 'the servant of all'11 and by serving mankind
in his obedient and sacrificial ministry, suffering and death. God's revelation
of himself in Christ necessarily involved conflict with evil, which brought
him to the cross. So God's highest service to mankind - the bringing of
salvation in Christ - is at the same time his profoundest witness to himself
in and through Christ's sacrifice on the cross. Christ is witness (xxxxxx)
as well as teacher, healer and saviour. The primary movement of witness
and service is therefore from God to the world, and it includes his affirmation
of the sanctity of life, his testimony against all that is evil, and also
his call to all mankind to 'repent, and believe in the gospel' (Mark 1.15).
- This movement is continued in the Church, the Body of Christ, when
in the power of the Holy Spirit it responds to God's call and offers itself
in witness and service to the world. The Church's witness and evangelism
call men to hear the good news and to receive the saving grace of Christ.
The apostolic Church exists by mission as fire exists by burning. Mission
is not merely one of many items of business for the Church or for a department
of the Church. The members of the Church are to be judged not least by
what they do to reach unbelievers. The evangelizing of one person by another
is the responsibility of lay people and clergy alike. The Church's mission
also includes its service of mankind, which brings the healing, forgiveness,
love and compassion of Christ to people in need, people in conflict and
people in the grip of sin and evil.
- Witness, evangelism, service, worship and sacrifice belong together,
for these are different sides of the same reality. So testimony in the
name of Jesus rightly given is also a service to one's neighbour; ministry
rightly performed in the name of Christ constitutes a witness to Jesus.
Worship (xxxxxxxxx) involves service of the people (its ancient
meaning), when we worship Christ by ministering to him in the sick, the
prisoner and the needy (Matt. 25.37-40). Where the Church is not at liberty
to organize developed social and philanthropic programmes of its own or
to take part in those organized jointly with others, its witness is carried
out through worship, prayer and personal ministry. The Church can bear
witness not only in word and deed but also in silence. Lives dedicated
to service proclaim the gospel. Sacrificial self-giving, suffering and
death may result from testimony to the truth of the gospel - or from testimony
against injustice, which is also testimony to the truth of God's concern
for the poor and the oppressed.
- Evangelism involves the Church in social action which can be an authentic
witness to the gospel and should not be separated from it or contrasted
with it. The Church should not engage in a social programme that becomes
an end in itself, for 'man shall not live by bread alone, but by every
word that proceeds from the mouth of God' (Matt. 4.4). The spirit in which
Christians act is different from that of humanism or secularism. It is
informed by a sense of God's grace, of sin and the need for repentance
and by an eschatological perspective. Nevertheless Christians are right
to be involved in the life of the world and in the wider struggle for justice,
freedom and peace, and for the removal of everything which threatens the
sacred gift of life to all mankind.
- The Church's witness and service minister to people's deepest spiritual,
physical and social needs. But in carrying out this mission the Church's
stance should be one of continual vigilance, as it lives 'in the world',
but is 'not of the world' (John 17.11-16) and as it seeks to be faithful
to Christ the true witness and servant.
- See the Moscow Agreed Statement Section VI, 'The Church as the Eucharistic
- See the Moscow Agreed Statement Section III, 'Scripture and Tradition'.
- Intercommunion: A Scottish Episcopalian Approach (1969), p.
- ACC Study paper on 'Full Communion' (1981), p. 7.
- PG 33, 1100 A7, or PG 96, 1409 D8, 9.
- Authority in the Church II, 5 and 17, in The final Report of
ARC1C, pp. 83 and 89.
- The statement in Authority in the Church II, 20 (ibid. p. 90) requires
- In this connection we would wish to qualify
what is said in the ARCIC report Authority in the
Church I, 23 (ibid. p. 64).
- See the Moscow Agreed Statement IV para. 17-18.
- Authority in the Church II, 32 (op. cit. p. 97).
- Polycarp, Letter to the Philippians, 5:2; cf. Mark 10.45.
II Faith in the Trinity, Prayer and Holiness
Participation in the grace of the Holy Trinity
- Trinitarian doctrine presupposes participation in the grace of the
Holy Trinity. The doctrine One God in Trinity is not an abstract philosophical
formula. It originates in the personal and corporate experience of the
grace of the Triune God which has been and is communicated to us in Jesus
Christ. This experience is not to be understood in a merely subjective
way. It is rooted in the historic fact of the incarnation and God's revelation
of himself in Christ. Doctrine is the attempt to express this revelation
in such a way as both to safeguard it from misunderstanding and to enable
others to share in it. The formulation of doctrine, which is based on the
Scriptures and on a tradition of careful theological reflection, should
in no way be seen as an independent intellectual exercise. Ultimately,
as St Gregory the Theologian (of Nazianzus) says, 'It is impossible to
express God and yet more impossible to conceive him'.1 Thus doctrinal formulae
should in no way detract from the mystery of God which is handed down in
the Church from the apostles by the Fathers. It is not the doctrine of
the Trinity but the One God in Trinity, the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit,
that constitutes the object of Christian worship and faith. Although we
may sometimes speak separately of God the Father, sometimes of God the
Son and sometimes of God the Holy Spirit, it is always understood that
there is no division of one person from another, but all and each reveal
in unity the grace and glory of the one Godhead.
- Christians participate in the grace of the
Holy Trinity as members of the Christian community. It is the Church which
is filled by the Holy Spirit and it is precisely for this reason that every
human person has the possibility of becoming a partaker of the divine nature
(2 Pet. 1.4). The Holy Spirit praying in us heals and renews us at the
centre of our being, that is to say in our hearts. The healing character
of the grace of the Holy Trinity in the life of the individual believer
and of the Church has important implications for the whole life of contemporary
- Christian prayer to God is always offered to the Holy Trinity. It is
usually addressed to the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit, although
it is also addressed to the Son and sometimes to the Holy Spirit. Although
prayer is at one level a human activity, at a deeper level it is the activity
in us of God the Holy Spirit, who dwells in our hearts by faith. As St
Paul says in Romans 8.26-7: 'Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness;
for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes
for us with sighs too deep for words.' So prayer becomes '. . . a possibility
by the boundless excellence of the grace of God'.2
- Common to East and West alike is the experience of the Holy Spirit
praying in us of which St Paul speaks in Galatians 4.6-7: 'God has sent
the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying "Abba! Father!".
So through God you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son then an
heir.' This prayer is described in the Christian tradition in a variety
of ways. In Greek patristic writings it is often spoken of as 'prayer of
the mind' (xxxxx xxxxx) where 'mind' is not understood as
'intellect' (in.the modern sense) but rather as what St Paul calls 'the
heart'. Very similar descriptions of the same experience of prayer are
to be found in early Latin authors like St John Cassian, St Gregory of
Tours and St Patrick.3
- In the Eastern Church one of the traditional forms of this prayer is
the 'Jesus Prayer'. But prayer of the heart can take other forms, which
equally lead to the same experience of the glory of Christ seen and declared
by the patriarchs, prophets, apostles, fathers and all the saints.
- Prayer of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the individual Christian
is inseparable from the common liturgical prayer of the Christian community.
It is particularly related to the grace given in Baptism, Chrismation (Confirmation)
and Eucharist and, generally, to the whole sacramental life of the Church
and to common prayer and the reading of Scripture. Both common liturgical
prayer and personal prayer are informed and shaped by the Church's faith
in God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
- Prayer, both corporate and individual, is an integral part of the life
of all Christians. The contemplative and active aspects of Christian life
should always be held together, although in the life of each Christian
one way or other may predominate at different times, and in the life of
some Christians one or the other may predominate throughout their life.
For all Christians progress in prayer and obedience involves readiness
to take up the cross, and commitment to a disciplined life, whose purpose
is their own personal growth in holiness and their more effective witness
and service in the Church and in society at large.
- The fruit of the Spirit praying in us is holiness, and at the heart
of holiness is love for God and neighbour. God's love works in us to produce
holiness, restoring in us the image of God and making us and all things
whole. In this life, Christians experience a tension between the call to
holiness and the power of sin, the struggle between 'flesh' and Spirit
(Gal. 5.17) which requires continual repentance and the assurance of God's
forgiveness. God's call to holiness is also a call to work for justice,
so that the Church's prayer for the coming of God's reign on earth as in
heaven requires of Christians that they co-operate with God in the world.
God's love for the world, embodied in Jesus Christ, works through the Holy
Spirit to transfigure all things into the new creation, and we are to make
manifest that love in the life of the world.
- Further discussions on the Filioque led to the reaffirmation
by both Anglicans and Orthodox of the agreement reached in Moscow in 1976
that this phrase should not be included in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan
Creed.4 Certain Anglican Churches have already acted upon this recommendation,
whilst others are still considering it.
- From the theological point of view the Orthodox stated that the doctrine
of the Filioque is unacceptable, although as expressed by Augustine,
it is capable of an Orthodox interpretation. According to the Orthodox
understanding the Son cannot be considered a cause or co-cause of the existence
of the Holy Spirit. In spite of this we find in certain Fathers, for example
St Maximus the Confessor (7th cent.),5 as explained by Anastasius the Librarian
(9th cent.),6 the opinion that the Filioque, as used in early
Latin theology, can be understood in an Orthodox way. According to this
interpretation a distinction should be made between two senses of procession,
one by which the Father causes the existence of the Spirit (xxxxxx) and
the other by which the Spirit shines forth from the Father and the
Son (xxxxx) This second sense of procession must be clearly differentiated
from the later Western use of the Filioque which observed no such
distinction but rather confused 'cause of existence' with 'communication
of essence' (xxxxxx) with (xxxxxx) Some Orthodox theologians, while affirming
that the doctrine of the Filioque is unacceptable for the Orthodox
Church, at the same time, having in mind the position of Professor Bolotov
(1854-1900) and his followers, regard the Filioque as a 'theologoumenon'
in the West.7
- On the Anglican side it was pointed out that the Filioque was
not to be regarded as a dogma which would have to be accepted by all Christians.
It was emphasized, however, that the following points are important for
a correct understanding of its intention:
The Anglicans on the Commission put on record that they do not wish to
defend the use of the term 'cause' in this context.8
- although the Western tradition has spoken from time to time of the
Son as a 'cause' (causa) of the Spirit, this language has not met with
favour and has fallen into disuse;
- the Western tradition has continued to maintain that the Father is
the sole 'fount of deity' (fons deitatis/ xxxxxx) at the same time as it
has associated the Son with the Father as the 'principle' (principium)
of the Spirit;
- the Western tradition, in speaking of the Father and the Son as 'one
principle', has not meant to imply that the Spirit proceeds from some undifferentiated
divine essence (xxxxx), as opposed to the persons (xxxxxxx) of
the Father and the Son.
1 Theological Orations II,
2 Origen.PG 11.416A.
3 St John Cassian, Collations X,
St Gregory of Tours, History of the Franks V, 10.
St Patrick, who writes in his Confession, chapter 25:
And another time I saw him praying in me and I was as it were within my
body and I heard above me, that is above my inner man, and there he was
praying earnestly with groans, and while this was going on I was in amazement
and I was wondering and I was considering who it could be who was praying
in me but at the end of the prayer he spoke to the effect thar it was the
Spirit, and at that I woke.
Translation in R. P. C. Hanson, The Life and Writings of The Historical
Saint Patrick (New York 1983), p. 94.
4 Moscow Agreed Statement, Section
5 St Maximus the Confessor, Letter
to Marinas, PC 91, 133D-136B, PG 90, 672 CD.
6 Migne, PL 129, 560D-561A.
7 See Archpriest Liveriy Voronov,
'The Filioque in the Ecumenical Perspective', in the Journal
of the Moscow Patriarchate 5 (1982), pp. 66-8; AOJDD.313; L. Voronov,
on the Theses of Bolotov; and AOJDD.283: a translation, taken from Professor
V.V. Bolotov's book On the Question of the Filioque (published
in 1914), of his 'Theses on the Filioque' together with a passage
(pp. 30-6) defining terms, which include Bolotov's own definition of a
theologoumenon as follows:
But I may be asked what I mean by xxxxxxxxxx. In essence it is
also a theological opinion, but only the opinion of those who for every
catholic are more than just theologians: they are the theological opinions
of the holy fathers of the one undivided church; they are the opinions
of those men, among whom are those who are fittingly called 'ecumenical
doctors'. Xxxxxxxxx I rate highly, but I do not in any case
exaggerate their significance, and I think that I 'quite sharply' distinguish
them from dogmas. The content of a dogma is truth: the content of a xxxxxxxx is
only what is probable. The realm of a dogma is necessaria, the realm of
a xxxxxxx is dubia: In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas!
8 For an outline of traditional Anglican
views see AOJDD.213, 'The Filioque in Ecumenical Perspective: a preliminary
Anglican response', by Professor Eugene Fairweather.
Ill Worship and Tradition
Paradosis - Tradition
- Looked at from outside, the two Churches appear to be very different
in their attitude to tradition, the Anglicans allowing a great variety
of attitude and teaching, the Orthodox being strongly attached to the definitions
and the structures of the tradition, especially to those established in
the Ecumenical Councils and by the Church Fathers.
- Nevertheless within the freedom existing in the Anglican Communion
there is a commitment and responsibility to the tradition, and a conviction
that there are elements in the tradition, for instance the historic Creeds
and the Chalcedonian definition, of permanent validity. On the Orthodox
side, there exists freedom and understanding of tradition as the constant
action of the Holy Spirit in the Church, an unceasing presence of the revelation
of the Word of God through the Holy Spirit, ever present, here and now.
Tradition is always open, ready to embrace the present and accept the future.
- The Anglicans share this understanding of tradition. Tradition, with
Scripture as the normative factor within it (see Moscow Agreed Statement,
Section III), is that which maintains our Christian identity, which develops
and nurtures our Christian obedience, and makes our Christian witness effective
in the power of the Holy Spirit.
- The tradition of the Church flows from the Father's gift of his Son
'for the life of the world', through the sojourning of the Holy Spirit
in the world to be a constant witness to the truth (John 15.26). The Church
draws its life and being from this same movement of the Father's love;
that is to say, the Church too lives 'for the life of the world'. Its tradition
is the living force and inexhaustible source of its mission to the world.
- The presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church enables the whole body
of the faithful, the pleroma of the Church, to be enriched and
strengthened in facing the problems of our time, both within the Church
and outside it. There is a variety of gifts of the Spirit which work together
for the building up of the Christian people for their work of witness and
service in the world for the common good. Both Anglicans and Orthodox see
in their fidelity to tradition a mutual bond, and a strong incentive to
closer co-operation in witness and service to the world.
- One aspect of the dynamic nature of tradition is to be seen in the
way in which the Church assimilates and sanctifies certain elements of
the cultures of the various societies in which the Church lives. The Fathers
of the Church, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, exercised a careful
discrimination in their use of material from the society around them. The
Church at the present time needs to exercise a similar discrimination,
remaining true to the mind (xxxxxxxxx) of the Fathers and facing
the new questions with which our century confronts us.
Worship and the Maintenance of the Faith
- Faith and worship are inseparable. Dogmas are not abstract ideas existing
in and for themselves, but revealed and saving truths and realities intended
to bring mankind into communion with God. Through the liturgical life of
the Church creation comes to share in this saving reality. Thus in worship
the Church becomes what she really is: body, fellowship, communion in Christ.
She maintains the true faith and is maintained in the truth faith by the
action and work of the Holy Spirit.
- The great affirmations of Christian doctrine have their liturgical
formulation and expression; all the saving truths of the faith are doxologically
and liturgically appropriated. The Catholic Faith is this, that we worship
God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Trinity con-substantial and undivided.
- Liturgy is the action by which the community celebrates the events
which created it, sustain it, and give it its future. In both Churches
corporate and personal worship are inseparable. It is only as members of
the worshipping Church that we can make a true confession of the faith.
For example, in the Orthodox Liturgy the Creed is introduced with the words:
'Let us love one another so that with one mind we may confess'. Moreover,
because of the nature of man and more especially the incarnation of the
Word, the tradition of Christian worship is outward as well as inward,
involving bodily gestures and material signs and objects as well as spiritual
- The liturgical life of the Church is the very heart of tradition. The
Church in the celebration of its Liturgy recalls the mighty acts of God
in the past, experiences them as present and living realities, and anticipates
the coming of the Lord in glory. In the presence of the risen Christ we
receive the promise of the coming Kingdom. Liturgical time is no cold and
lifeless representation of past events, nor simply an historical record.
In it Christ himself is living in his Church. Liturgical time is time transfigured
through liturgical act, for it is time animated by 'the fervour of faith
full of the Holy Spirit' (Liturgy of St John Chrysostom). Thus by worship
we live in the new time of the Kingdom. That implies two things: first,
the entrance of the Lord of glory into our history as the Saviour of the
world, and second, our entrance into the eternal Kingdom of the Holy Trinity
- Liturgy and all Christian worship are rooted in salvation history.
Salvation history with all its mighty events in both the Old and New Covenants
is confessed, celebrated and appropriated by means of the liturgical year.
The centre of that year, as of salvation history itself, is the saving
person and work of Jesus Christ present in the power of the Holy Spirit.
- In the Eucharist we become partakers of the Lord's Supper. The Eucharist
is anamnesis and participation in the death and resurrection of Christ,
liturgically affirmed and realized in the annual celebration of the Paschal
mystery. This is renewed every week in the feast of the Lord's Day and
in every celebration of the Holy Eucharist. The fact of the resurrection
of Christ is the basis of Christian faith and worship, since as St Paul
says: 'If Christ has not been raised . . . your faith is in vain'(l Cor.
- The significance of the resurrection is liturgically experienced and
expressed in the preparatory season of Lent and in the season which follows,
from Easter through the Ascension to Pentecost. In the coming of the Paraclete,
the whole mystery of Christ is realized: the Holy Spirit takes the things
of Christ and shows them to us, making them real in every age; the Paraclete
is thus the constant source of life in the tradition of the Church.
- The Church baptizes her members into the death and resurrection of
her Lord, bringing them from the state of sin and death into membership
of his body and participation in his eternal life. The centrality of the
Easter solemnity has made Easter the supreme occasion for the administration
of the rites of Christian initiation.
- As in the divine economy of salvation, the atonement achieved by the
death and resurrection of Christ presupposes the incarnation and the incarnate
life of Christ, so in the Christian year, the feast of Easter presupposes
the feasts of the Nativity and the Epiphany and the other feasts related
to the life of our Saviour. Thus we have the yearly cycle of the feasts
of our Lord. In the West the season of Advent prepares Christians to celebrate
Christ's coming as Saviour, and reminds them of his future coming in judgement
- Finally the liturgical year includes the feasts of the Blessed Virgin
Mary, Mother of God, and of the Saints, witnessing thus to the dogmatic
truth that Christ the head of the Church remains always united with the
members of his body and that there is no separation between the militant
and triumphant Church. 'The Lord is wonderful in his Saints', and in the
communion of the saints we see again the power of the resurrection in the
life and tradition of the Church destroying death and transfiguring time.
- Anglicans and Orthodox hold that the liturgy and all worship are essentially
for the expression, maintenance and communication of the true faith. Liturgical
texts are thus fundamental doctrinal standards for both. Both recognize
the possibility of the Church making liturgical revisions according to
the necessity of the times, and with a view to the salvation of the people
of God. They differ only in their estimation of the need for such revisions
in the present situation, this difference reflecting their diverse historical
experiences and situations.
- In both Anglican and Orthodox traditions, prayers and devotions in
the family are understood as an extension of the corporate worship of the
Church. From New Testament times onwards the Christian family has been
considered to be a household church. The rite of marriage, a sign or image
of the spiritual union between Christ and his Church, initiates a relationship
within which children may be nurtured and where the faith is taught, lived,
and communicated to others.
- The traditions of both Churches are rich in a variety of family devotions
and customs which include the use of parts of the Divine Office, reverence
of icons, use of crosses and pictures, grace at meals, Bible reading, as
well as blessings of events and turning points of family life. Both Anglican
and Orthodox members are convinced of the importance of the family and
the household church as a vehicle of the tradition of the Church and wish
to explore this further.
The Communion of Saints and the Departed
- All prayer is ultimately addressed to the Triune God. We pray to God
the Father through our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Spirit. The Church
is united in a single movement of worship with the Church in heaven, with
the Blessed Virgin Mary, 'with angels and archangels, and all the company
of heaven'. The Orthodox also pray to the Blessed Virgin Mary and Theotokos
and the saints as friends and living images of Christ.
- Those who believe and are baptized form one body in Christ, and are
members one of another, united by the Holy Spirit. Within the Body each
member suffers and rejoices with the others, and in each member the Holy
Spirit intercedes for the whole. These relationships are changed but not
broken by death. 'He is not God of the dead, but of the living' (Matt.
22.32), for all live in and to him. This is the meaning of the communion
- God is 'the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'
(Exod. 3.6), 'the Lord of hosts' (Isa. 6.3), 'the God and Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ' (Rom. 15.6). Our God is not an abstract idea, but the
God of persons, revealing himself in and to particular men and women. Union
with God therefore involves us in a personal relationship with all who
belong to him through the grace of the Holy Spirit who both unites and
diversifies: and this personal relationship, which is not broken by death,
is precisely the communion of saints.
- Our experience of the communion of saints finds its fullest expression
in the Eucharist, in which the whole Body of Christ realizes its unity
in the Holy Spirit. We see this in ancient eucharistic prayers of East
and West, which commemorate the saints and intercede for the departed as
well as for the living.
- 'Christ is risen from the dead trampling down death by death. . . '
By virtue of Christ's cross and resurrection, death is no longer an impassable
barrier. It is this sense of our continuing union in the risen Christ that
forms for all Orthodox the basis of prayer for the dead and the invocation
of the saints. Mainly as a result of the abuses of the medieval West, and
the consequent Reformation in the sixteenth century, Anglicans rejected
much of the practice and teaching of the Church of that time. The cult
of the saints and prayer for the departed were criticized on the grounds
of the all-sufficiency of Christ's redeeming work. Today there is a variety
of practice among Anglicans on these matters. All remain careful in the
language which they use in prayer for the departed, being anxious not to
return to the errors of the Western Middle Ages. But all affirm our union
with the departed in the risen Christ.
- God's love is present everywhere and is offered to everybody, but not
everyone accepts it. According to some Fathers, even those in hell are
not deprived of the love of God but by their own free choice they experience
as torment what the saints experience as joy. The light of God's glory
is also the fire of judgement. God's wrath is no other than his love; how
we experience that love, in this life and after death, depends on our attitude.
The Orthodox Church in the prayers of Pentecost, believing that Christ
has the keys of death and hell (Rev. 1.18), and hoping that the love of
God will find a response in the souls even of some who are in hell, prays
for their salvation, although their ultimate destiny remains a mystery
(Matt. 25.31-46 as understood by the Fathers).1
- ' . . . from one degree of glory to another' (2 Cor. 3.18): for the
righteous, in the view of the Orthodox and also of many Anglicans, further
progress and growth in the love of God will continue for ever. After death,
this progress is to be thought of in terms of healing rather than satisfaction
or retribution. Other Anglicans think of perfection in Christ as an immediate
gift in the life to come. As Anglicans and Orthodox we are agreed in rejecting
any doctrine of purgatory which suggests that the departed through their
sufferings are making 'satisfaction' or 'expiation' for their sins. The
traditional practice of the Church in praying for the faithful departed
is to be understood as an expression of the unity between the Church militant
and the Church triumphant, and of the love which one bears to the other.
- Prayers for the departed are therefore to be seen, not in juridical
terms, but as an expression of mutual love and solidarity in Christ: 'we
pray for them because we still hold them in our love' (Catechism of the
Episcopal Church, USA).
- The prayers of the saints on our behalf are likewise to be understood
as an expression of mutual love and shared life in the Holy Spirit. Such
a term as 'treasury of merits' is foreign to both our traditions. 'There
is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ
Jesus' (1 Tim. 2.5): the intercession of the saints for us is always in
and through this unique mediation of Christ. The saints reign with Christ
(cf. Luke 22.29-30): Christ is the King, and the saints share in his kingly
- The Blessed Virgin Mary played a unique role in the economy of salvation
by virtue of the fact that she was chosen to be Mother of Christ our God.
Her intercession is not autonomous, but presupposes Christ's intercession
and is based upon the saving work of the incarnate Word.
- The Orthodox practice of commemorating the saints of the Old Testament
powerfully affirms the way in which the whole history of salvation is made
present in the liturgy of the Church.
- All Anglican liturgies refer to the communion of saints by thanking
God for that communion and for the lives and examples of particular saints,
and some refer to the saints' prayers for us, but very few contain invocations
addressed directly to saints.
- Much of the language in which we speak of the saints and the departed
is derived from the life of prayer and piety. Many of the Church's affirmations
concerning the communion of saints are in hymnography and iconography.
At the same time there is an appropriate doctrinal reserve which reflects
the mystery of our relationship with the departed. It is in God alone that
we have communion with them.
- In the incarnation human nature, body as well as soul, was assumed
into the life of the Word of God; and in the renewed creation, which this
incarnation has effected, the whole material world is sanctified, and the
destructive opposition of matter and spirit overcome.
- In the Orthodox tradition the depiction and use of icons has a christological
foundation. The icon is understood as an important means whereby we confess
and appropriate the mystery of the incarnation.
- Anglicans have in the past felt serious difficulties about this question.
For example a committee of the Lambeth Conference in 1888 said: 'It would
be difficult for us to enter more intimate relations with that (sc. Orthodox)
Church as long as it retains the use of icons.' These difficulties are
part of a larger history of the West. The decrees of the Seventh Ecumenical
Council were not properly understood in the West owing to the unfortunate
translation of the Greek word xxxxxxxxxx (veneration) by the Latin
word adoratio (worship). The subsequent uncontrolled development
of visual imagery later in the Middle Ages in the West led to strong reactions,
above all at the time of the Reformation. The Reformers understood the
prohibition of idolatry in the Ten Commandments as applying to the practices
of their own day. They sought to purify and simplify the worship of the
Church, in order that glory might be given to God alone. In particular
they rejected the worship of images.
- Anglicans however did not reject all use of bodily gestures and images
in the worship of the Church. The Book of Common Prayer retains, for example,
the use of the sign of the cross in Baptism, and the giving of a ring in
marriage. In the controversies in the century following the Reformation,
Anglicans constantly appealed to the words of St Paul, 'All things should
be done decently and in order' (1 Cor. 14.40). In his exposition of the
Church Catechism, The Practice of Divine Love, Bishop Thomas Ken
(1637-1711) prays, 'give me grace to pay a religious, suitable veneration
to all sacred persons or places or things which are thine by solemn dedication
and separated for the uses of divine love, and the communications of thy
grace, or which may promote the decency and order of the worship, or the
edification of faithful people'. In fact a distinctive Anglican tradition
of religious art developed. During the last hundred years increasing contact
with the Orthodox Churches and a fuller knowledge of their tradition have
brought new light to this question.
- In the light of the present discussion the Anglicans do not find any
cause for disagreement in the doctrine as stated by St John of Damascus:
'In times past, God, without body and form could in no way be represented.
But now since God has appeared in flesh and lived among men, I can depict
that which is visible of God. I do not venerate matter, but I venerate
the creator of matter, who became matter for me, who condescended to live
in matter, and who through matter accomplished my salvation; and I do not
cease to respect the matter through which my salvation is accomplished.'2
- By the incarnation of the Word who is the image of the Father (2 Cor.
4.4; Col. 1.15;Heb. 1.3) the image of God in every man is restored and
the material world itself sanctified and again made capable of mediating
the divine beauty. Icons are used as a means of expressing, as far as it
can be expressed, the glory of God seen in the face of Jesus Chirst (2
Cor. 4.6), and in the faces of his friends. Icons are words in painting,
referring to the history of salvation and its manifestation in specific
persons. Icons have always been understood as a visible gospel, as a testimony
to the great things given to us by God the Word incarnate. In the Council
of 860 it was stated that 'all that is uttered in words written in syllables
is also proclaimed in the language of colours'. From this perspective icons
and Scripture are linked through an inner relationship; both coexist in
the Church and proclaim the same truths. 'Just as in the Bible we listen
to the word of Christ and are sanctified ... in the same way through the
painted icons we behold the representation of his human form . . . and
are likewise sanctified' (St John of Damascus).3
- An icon is a means of entering into contact with the person or event
it represents. It is not an end in itself. In the words of St Basil: 'The
honour shown to the icon passes to the prototype'.4 It guides us to a vision
of the divine Kingdom where past, present and future are one. It makes
vivid our faith in the communion of the saints. In the definition of the
Seventh Ecumenical Council we read: 'The more frequently they (sc. icons)
are seen, the more those who behold them are aroused to remember and desire
the prototypes and to give them greeting and the veneration of honour;
not indeed true worship which, according to our faith, is due to God alone.'5
- Just as Scripture is understood within the community of faith, so too
the icon is understood within the same community of faith and worship.
It is an essentially liturgical form of art. In response to the faith and
prayer of the believers, God, through the icon, bestows his sanctifying
and healing grace. Thus the icon serves to promote the communication of
the gospel and hence its making and use must always be controlled by theological
criteria. It is not a random decoration, but an integral part of the Church's
life and worship. In this respect its place in the Church's worship can
be compared with the place of music and chant and with the faithful preaching
of the word of God.
- In our time, when visual imagery plays a more and more important part
in people's lives, the tradition of icons has acquired a startling relevance.
It presents the Church with a new possibility of proclaiming the gospel
in a society in which language is often devalued.
1 Eg. PC 57-8, 717ff.
2 On Holy Icons I, PG94, 1245B.
3 On Holy Icons III, PG94, 1333D.
4 On Holy Spirit 18, PG 32, 149 C8f.
5 Mansi, Concilia XIII, 482.
- At this point in our work, after twelve years of discussion, we feel
it right to attempt a summary of the progress that, as Anglicans and Orthodox,
we have been able to achieve with God's help. We note in particular the
following points over which we agree or disagree, or which we see as requiring
I The Knowledge of God
- Here we have discovered a difference in terminology, but no difference
in fundamental belief. The normal Orthodox ways of speaking about the essence
and energies of God, and about 'divinization' (xxxxxxxx), are not employed
by most Anglicans, but Anglicans do not reject the underlying doctrine
which this language expresses.1
II Scripture and Tradition
- (a) We agree in our basic understanding of the inspiration and authority
of Scripture, and we agree more particularly that the Church gives attention
to the results of scholarly research concerning the Bible. But we have
not attempted to state in detail how critical methods of historical research
are to be applied to the Bible, for we see this as a task outside the scope
of a commission such as our own. We have noted a minor difference over
the distinction which both Churches make between the canonical books of
the Old Testament and the deutero-canonical books: the Orthodox Church
has not pronounced officially on the nature of the distinction, as is done
in the Articles of the Church of England.2
- (b) We agree likewise in our view of the fundamental relationship
between Scripture and tradition: they are not two sources, but correlative.
We agree that the Church cannot define dogmas which are not grounded both
in Scripture and in tradition. We agree that the 'mind' (xxxxxxxx) of the
Fathers is of lasting importance for our understanding of the Christian
- We agree that tradition is to be seen in dynamic terms, as the constant
action of the Holy Spirit in the Church; and therefore both our delegations
accept that there exist freedom and variety within the one tradition of
the Church. But we have not yet attempted to state in detail what are the
limits of that freedom and variety in regard to every specific point of
Ill The Holy Trinity
- (a) We agree in affirming that prayer and sanctification are founded
upon the grace of the Holy Trinity.4
- (b) We agree that the original form of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan
Creed referred to the origin of the Holy Spirit from the Father. For this
reason, and because the Filioque was introduced into the Creed
without the authority of an Ecumenical Council and without due regard to
catholic consent, the Anglicans agree with the Orthodox that the Filioque should
not be included in the Creed.5
- We have discussed how far the doctrine implied by the Filioque (as
distinguished from the inclusion of the Filioque in the Creed)
is acceptable to our two churches. Here we have failed to reach full agreement.
The Anglican delegates regard the Filioque as a valid theological
statement, though not as a dogma. The Orthodox delegates regard the doctrine
of the Filioque as unacceptable, but they note that according
to some Eastern Fathers, the use of the Filioque in early Latin
theology can be understood in an Orthodox way.6
IV The Church
- (a) We agree in our fundamental understanding of the Church
as one, holy, catholic and apostolic.7
- (b) Despite differences in the outward forms of wider leadership
within our two Communions, there is fundamental agreement between the way
in which Anglicans understand 'primacy' and the way in which Orthodox understand
'seniority'. We agree more particularly that all levels of wider leadership
within the Church are to be envisaged in terms not of coercion but of pastoral
- (c) We agree in our basic understanding of witness, evangelism
and service within the Church. More especially we affirm that missionary
witness to unbelievers, and sacrificial service to those in need, are the
shared responsibility of all church members, clergy and lay people alike.9
- (d) But while we agree that the Church is one, holy, catholic
and apostolic, we are not agreed on the account to be given of the sinfulness
and division which is to be observed in the life of Christian communities.
For Anglicans, because the Church under Christ is the community where God's
grace is at work, healing and transforming sinful men and women; and because
grace in the Church is mediated through those who are themselves undergoing
such transformation, the struggle between grace and sin is to be seen as
characteristic of, rather than accidental to, the Church on earth. Orthodox,
while agreeing that the human members of the Church on earth are sinful,
do not believe that sinfulness should be ascribed to the Church as the
body of Christ indwelt by the Holy Spirit.
- (e) As regards the first of the four marks of the Church,
its oneness, we disagree in our view of the relationship between the Church's
basic unity and the present state of division between Christians. The Anglican
members see our divisions as existing within the Church while the Orthodox
members believe that the Orthodox Church is the one true Church of Christ,
which as his Body is not and cannot be divided.10
- (f) With this is linked a further disagreement, concerning communion
and intercommunion. The Anglican tradition accepts as legitimate, in certain
situations, the use of intercommunion as a means towards the attainment
of full organic unity. The Orthodox reject the notion of intercommunion,
and believe that there can be communion only between local churches that
have a unity of faith, ministry and sacraments.11
- (g) As regards the fourth of the four marks of the Church,
its apostolicity, we agree that this is manifested in a particular way
through the succession of bishops and that this succession is a sign of
the unbroken continuity of apostolic tradition and life.12 But we have
not so far discussed what is the attitude of our two Churches towards such
communities as have not preserved the succession of bishops in an outward
and visible form. Nor have we discussed the Orthodox view of the validity
of Anglican ordinations.
- (h) We have failed to reach agreement concerning the possibility,
or otherwise, of the ordination of worn en to the priesthood. The Orthodox
affirm that such ordination is impossible, since it is contrary to Scripture
and tradition. With this some Anglicans agree, while others believe that
it is possible, and even desirable at the present moment, to ordain women
as priests.13 There are, however, many related issues that we have not
so far examined in any detail, particularly the following: how we are to
understand the distinction within humanity between man and woman; what
is meant by sacramental priesthood, and how this is related to the unique
high priesthood of Christ and to the royal priesthood of all the baptized;
what, apart from the sacramental priesthood, are the other forms of ministry
within the Church.
- (a) We agree that the Ecumenical Councils provide an authoritative
interpretation of Scripture in order to safeguard the salvation of the
People of God.
- (b) We differ, however, in our understanding of the relative importance
of the Councils. While the Anglican members lay greater emphasis upon the
first four Councils, and less upon the fifth, sixth and seventh, applying
to conciliar decisions the concept of an 'order' or 'hierarchy of truths',
the Orthodox members find this concept to be in conflict with the unity
of the faith as a whole.
- (c) We are agreed in considering that infallibility is not
the property of any particular person in the Church. But we consider that
the implications of the terms 'infallible' and 'indefectible' need to be
- (d) We are agreed that the ecumenicity of Councils is manifested
through their acceptance by the Church. But we feel that further discussion
is needed of the processes whereby the teaching of Councils is recognized
VI Faith and Worship, Church and Eucharist
- (a) We are agreed about the integral link between faith and
worship, between the tradition of the Church and its liturgical life. We
are agreed in our general understanding of baptism, although we have not
discussed this in detail. We are agreed in describing the Eucharist as
an anamnesis and participation in the death and resurrection of
- (b) We are agreed in regarding the Church as a eucharistic
community: the Eucharist actualizes the Church. In each local eucharistic
celebration the visible unity and catholicity of the Church is fully manifested.
The question of the relationship between the celebrant and his bishop and
that among bishops themselves requires further study.16
- (c) We are agreed in attaching cardinal importance to the action of
the Holy Spirit in the Eucharist, as also throughout the entire life of
the Church. In the Orthodox eucharistic liturgy this is an invocation (xxxxxxx)
of the Holy Spirit; in some Anglican liturgies there is no such explicit epiclesis, but
all Anglicans are agreed that the operation of the Holy Spirit is essential
to the Eucharist.17
- (d) We are agreed that through the consecratory prayer, addressed
to the Father, the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of the glorified
Christ by the action of the Holy Spirit in such a way that the faithful
people of God receiving Christ may feed upon him in the sacrament.18 But
we have not yet discussed in detail what is the nature of the ineffable
change effected through the consecratory prayer, nor have we considered
how far the Eucharist may be regarded as a sacrifice.19
- (e) We have reached basic agreement on the communion of saints
and the departed. All of us believe that the communion of the Holy Spirit
joins in unity the members of the Body, whether living or departed, and
this unity is expressed in prayer and thanksgiving. There remains, however,
a certain difference here between Orthodoxy and Anglicanism, since in most
Anglican Churches, requests to the saints to pray for us are not made,
and also prayers for the faithful departed, though common, are by no means
universal; and some Anglicans believe that only thanksgiving for the departed
is appropriate. Moreover, not all Anglicans agree with the Orthodox Patristic
understanding of endless progress after death.20
- (f) In regard to icons we have found that notwithstanding past Anglican
objections and despite differences in liturgical practice, there is no
serious disagreement here between Anglicanism and Orthodoxy. It is true
that Anglicans do not believe that the veneration of icons, as practised
in the East, can be required of all Christians. But Anglicans agree that
the theology of the icon is founded upon, and intended to safeguard, the
doctrine of the incarnation. They also accept that it is legitimate to
regard the icon, not merely as a decoration, but as a means of entering
into relationship with the person or event it represents; and to hold that
in response to the faith and prayer of the believers, God through the icon,
bestows his sanctifying grace. We have not yet adequately discussed the
difference between two- and three-dimensional images.21
- None of the points of disagreement mentioned above is to be regarded
as insoluble, but each is to be regarded as a challenge to this Commission,
or to some similar body to be appointed in the future by our two Churches,
to advance more deeply in its understanding of the truth. Anglicans and
Orthodox alike, we are called to 'reach out towards that which lies ahead,
pressing forward to win the prize which is God's call to the life above,
in Christ Jesus' (Phil. 3.13-14).
1 Moscow Agreed Statement para. 1-3.
2 MAS para. 4-8.
3 MAS para. 9-12; Dublin Agreed Statement
4 DAS para. 36-43.
5 MAS para. 19-21.
6 DAS para. 44-6.
7 DAS para. 2-17.
8 DAS para. 21-30.
9 DAS para. 31-5.
10 DAS para. 8-9.
11 DAS para. 18-20.
12 DAS para. 14-17.
13 DAS Appendix 2.
14 MAS para. 13-18; DAS para. 29-30.
15 DAS para. 53-65.
16 MAS para. 22-7.
17 MAS para. 29-32.
18 MAS para. 25-6.
19 MAS para. 22 refers to the Bucharest Statement
of 1935 on the Eucharist, which is printed with an introduction on pp.
92-3 of Anglican-Orthodox Dialogue: Moscow Agreed Statement (SPCK
1977). However we have not discussed it in detail, nor, acting as a Joint
Commission, have we as yet expressed our agreement or otherwise with the
six points that it contains.
20 DAS para. 66-78.
21 DAS para. 79-87; MAS para. 15.
The Moscow Agreed Statement1976
I The Knowledge of God
- God is both immanent and transcendent. By virtue of the divine self-revelation,
man experiences personal communion with God. By faith and through obedience
he shares truly in the divine life and is united with God the Holy Trinity.
By grace he enjoys the pledge and first-fruits of eternal glory. But, however
close this union may be, there remains always an all-important distinction
between God and man, Creator and creature, infinite and finite.
- To safeguard both the transcendence of God and the possibility of man's
true union with him the Orthodox Church draws a distinction between the
divine essence, which remains for ever beyond man's comprehension and knowledge,
and the divine energies, by participation in which man participates in
God. The divine energies are God himself in his self-manifestation. This
distinction is not normally used by Anglicans, but in various ways they
also seek to express the belief that God is at once incomprehensible, yet
truly knowable by man.
- To describe the fullness of man's sanctification and the way in which
he shares in the life of God, the Orthodox Church uses the Patristic term theosis
kata charin (divinization by grace). Once again such language is not
normally used by Anglicans, some of whom regard it as misleading and dangerous.
At the same time Anglicans recognize that, when Orthodox speak in this
manner, they do so only with the most careful safeguards. Anglicans do
not reject the underlying doctrine which this language seeks to express;
indeed, such teaching is to be found in their own liturgies and hymnody.
II The Inspiration and Authority of Holy Scripture
- The Scriptures constitute a coherent whole. They are at once divinely
inspired and humanly expressed. They bear authoritative witness to God's
revelation of himself in creation, in the Incarnation of the Word and in
the whole history of salvation, and as such express the Word of God in
- We know, receive, and interpret Scripture through the Church and in
the Church. Our approach to the Bible is one of obedience so that we may
hear the revelation of himself that God gives through it.
- The books of Scripture contained in the Cano, are authoritative because
they truly convey the authentic revelation of God, which the Church recognizes
in tnem. Their authority is not determined by any particular theories concerning
the authorship of these books or the historical circumstances in which
they were written. The Church gives attention to the results of scholarly
research concerning the Bible from whatever quarter they come, but it tests
them in the light of its experience and understanding of the faith as a
- The Church believes in the apostolic origin of the New Testament, as
containing the witness of those who had seen the Lord.
- Both the Orthodox and the Anglican Churches make a distinction between
the canonical books of the Old Testament and the deutero-canonical books
(otherwise called the Anagino-skomena) although the Orthodox Churches
have not pronounced officially on the nature of the distinction, as is
done in the Anglican Articles. Both Communions are agreed in regarding
the deuterocanonical books as edifying and both, and in particular the
Orthodox Church, make liturgical use of them.
Ill Scripture and Tradition
- Any disjunction between Scripture and Tradition such as would treat
them as two separate 'sources of revelation' must be rejected. The two
are correlative. We affirm (i) that Scripture is the main criterion whereby
the Church tests traditions to determine whether they are truly part of
Holy Tradition or not; (ii) that Holy Tradition completes Holy Scripture
in the sense that it safeguards the integrity of the biblical message.
- (i) By the term Holy Tradition we understand the entire life of the
Church in the Holy Spirit. This tradition expresses itself in dogmatic
teaching, in liturgical worship, in canonical discipline, and in spiritual
life. These elements together manifest the single and indivisible life
of the Church.
(ii) Of supreme importance is the dogmatic tradition, which in substance
is unchangeable. In seeking to communicate the saving truth to mankind,
the Church in every generation makes use of contemporary language and therefore
of contemporary modes of thought; but this usage must always be tested
by the standard of Scripture and of the dogmatic definitions of the Ecumenical
Councils. The mind (phronema) of the Fathers, their theological
method, their terminology and modes of expression have a lasting importance
in both the Orthodox and the Anglican Churches.
(iii) The liturgical and canonical expressions of Tradition can differ,
in that they are concerned with varying situations of the people of God
in different historical periods and in different places. The liturgical
and canonical traditions remain unchangeable to the extent that they embody
the unchangeable truth of divine revelation and respond to the unchanging
needs of mankind.
- The Church cannot define dogmas which are not grounded both in Holy
Scripture and in Holy Tradition, but has the power, particularly in Ecumenical
Councils, to formulate the truths of the faith more exactly and precisely
when the needs of the Church require it.
- The understanding of Scripture and Tradition embodied in paragraphs
4 to 11 offers to our Churches a solid basis for closer rapprochement.
IV The Authority of the Council
- We are agreed that the notions of Church and Scripture are inseparable.
The Scriptures contain the witness of the prophets and apostles to the
revelation of himself which God the Father made to man through his Son
in his Holy Spirit. The Councils maintain this witness and provide an authoritative
interpretation of it. We recognize the work of the Holy Spirit in the Church
not only in the Scriptures, but also in the Councils, and in the whole
process whereby Scriptures and Councils have been received as authoritative.
At the same time we confess that the tradition of the Church is a living
one in which the Spirit continues his work of maintaining the true witness
to the Revelation of God, the faith once delivered to the saints.
- We note that Anglican members, while accepting the dogmatic degrees
of the fifth, sixth, and seventh Councils, have long been accustomed to
lay more emphasis on the first four, and believe that the concept of 'an
order or "hierarchy" of truths' can usefully be applied to the
decisions of the Councils. The Orthodox members find this concept to be
in conflict with the unity of the faith as a whole, though they recognize
gradations of importance in matters of practice.
- The Orthodox regard the Seventh Council as of equal importance with
the other Ecumenical Councils. They understand its positive injunctions
about the veneration of icons as an expression of faith in the Incarnation.
The Anglican tradition places a similarly positive value on the created
order, and on the place of the body and material things in worship. Like
the Orthodox, Anglicans see this as a necessary corollary of the doctrine
of the Incarnation. They welcome the decisions of the Seventh Council in
so far as they constitute a defence of the doctrine of the Incarnation.
They agree that the veneration of icons as practised in the East is not
to be rejected, but do not believe that it can be required of all Christians.
It is quite clear that further discussion of the Seventh Council and of
icons is necessary in the dialogue between Orthodox and Anglicans, as also
of Western three-dimensional images and religious paintings which we have
not adequately discussed.
- We are agreed that according to the Scriptures and the Fathers the
fullness of saving truth has been given to the Church. She is the Temple
of God, in which God's Spirit dwells, the Pillar and the Ground of truth.
Christ has promised that he will be with her until the End of the Age and
the Holy Spirit will guide her into all truth (1 Cor. 3.16; 1 Tim. 3.15;
Matt. 28.20; John 16.13).
- Both Anglican and Orthodox agree that infallibility is not the property
of any particular institution or person in the Church, but that the promises
of Christ are made to the whole Church. The ecumenicity of Councils is
manifested through their acceptance by the Church. For the Orthodox, the
Ecumenical Council is not an institution but a charismatic event in the
life of the Church and is the highest expression of the Church's inerrancy.
- It is clear that further exploration and discussion of this and kindred
questions will be needed. Among the points to be taken into account are:
(a) The use of the words 'infallible' and 'indefectible' in discussion
of ecclesiology is of medieval and modern Western origin.
(b) For Anglicans, the concept of infallibility has acquired unfortunate
associations by reason of the definition of the First Vatican Council,
and of the manner in which papal authority has been exercised. For the
Orthodox, the concept of indefectibility has ambiguous associations on
account of the way in which it has been used in modern theology.
(c) A theological evaluation is required of processes whereby the teaching
of Councils has been recognized and received.
V The Filioque Clause
- The question of the Filioque is in the first instance a question
of the content of the Creed, i.e. the summary of the articles of faith
which are to be confessed by all. In the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed
(commonly called the Nicene Creed) of 381 the words 'proceeding from the
Father' are an assertion of the divine origin and nature of the Holy Spirit,
parallel to the assertion of the divine origin and nature of the Son contained
in the words 'begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father'. The word ekporeuomenon (proceeding),
as used in the Creed, denotes the incomprehensible mode of the Spirit's
origin from the Father, employing the language of Scripture (John 15.26).
It asserts that the Spirit comes from the Father in a manner which is not
that of generation.
- The question of the origin of the Holy Spirit is to be distinguished
from that of his mission to the world. It is with reference to the mission
of the Spirit that we are to understand the biblical texts which speak
both of the Father (John 14.26) and of the Son (John 15.26) as sending (pempein) the
- The Anglican members therefore agree that:
(a) because the original form of the Creed referred to the origin of the
Holy Spirit from the Father,
(b) because the Filioque clause was introduced into this Creed
without the authority of an Ecumenical Council and without due regard for
Catholic consent, and
(c) because this Creed constitutes the public confession
of faith by the People of God in the Eucharist, the Filioque clause
should not be included in this Creed.
VI The Church as the Eucharistic Community
- The eucharistic teaching and practice of the Churches, mutually confessed,
constitutes an essential factor for the understanding which can lead to
reunion between the Orthodox and Anglican Churches. This understanding
commits both our Churches to a close relationship which can provide the
basis for further steps on the way to reconciliation and union. Already
in the past there has been considerable agreement between representatives
of our two Churches regarding the doctrine of the Eucharist. We note particularly
the six points of the Bucharest Conference of 1935. We now report the following
points of agreement:
- The eucharistic understanding of the Church affirms the presence of
Jesus Christ in the Church, which is his Body, and in the Eucharist. Through
the action of the Holy Spirit, all faithful communicants share in the one
Body of Christ, and become one body in him.
- The Eucharist actualizes the Church. The Christian community has a
basic sacramental character. The Church can be described as a synaxis or
an ecclesia, which is, in its essence, a worshipping and eucharistic
assembly. The Church is not only built up by the Eucharist, but is also
a condition for it. Therefore one must be a believing member of the Church
in order to receive the Holy Communion. The Church celebrating the Eucharist
becomes fully itself; that is koinonia, fellowship - communion.
The Church celebrates the Eucharist as the central act of its existence,
in which the ecclesial community, as a living reality confessing its faith,
receives its realization.
- Through the consecratory prayer, addressed to the Father, the bread
and wine become the Body and Blood of the glorified Christ by the action
of the Holy Spirit in such a way that the faithful people of God receiving
Christ may feed upon him in the sacrament (1 Cor. 10.16). Thus the Church
depends upon the action of the Holy Spirit and is the visible community
in which the Spirit is known.
- The eucharisdc action of the Church is the Passover from the old to
the new. It anticipates and really shares in the eternal Rule and Glory
of God. Following the Apostolic and Patristic teaching, we affirm that
the eucharistic elements become, by the grace of the Holy Spirit, the Body
and Blood of Christ, the bread of immortality, to give to us the forgiveness
of sins, the new creation, and eternal life. The celebration of the Church
in liturgy carries with it the sense of the eternal reality which precedes
it, abides in it, and is still to come.
- In the Eucharist the eternal priesthood of Christ is constantly manifested
in time. The celebrant, in his liturgical action, has a twofold ministry:
as an icon of Christ, acting in the name of Christ, towards the community
and also as a representative of the community expressing the priesthood
of the faithful. In each local eucharistic celebration the visible unity
and catholicity of the Church is manifested fully. The question of the
relationship between the celebrant and his bishop and that among bishops
themselves requires further study.
- The Eucharist impels the believers to specific action in mission and
service to the world. In the eucharistic celebration the Church is a confessing
community which witnesses to the cosmic transfiguration. Thus God enters
into a personal historic situation as the Lord of creation and of history.
In the Eucharist the End breaks into our midst, bringing the judgement
and hope of the New Age. The final dismissal or benediction in the liturgy
is not an end to worship but a call to prayer and witness so that in the
power of the Holy Spirit the believers may announce and convey to the world
that which they have seen and received in the Eucharist.
VII The Invocation of the Holy Spirit in the Eucharist
- The Eucharist is the action of the Holy Trinity. The Father gives the
Body and the Blood of Christ by the descent of the Holy Spirit to the Church
in response to the Church's prayer. The Liturgy is this prayer for the
eucharistic gifts to be given. It is in this context that the invocation
of the Holy Spirit should be understood. The operation of the Holy Spirit
is essential to the Eucharist whether it is explicitly expressed or not.
When it is articulated, the 'Epiclesis' voices the work of the Spirit with
the Father in the consecration of the elements as the Body and Blood of
- The consecration of the bread and the wine results from the whole sacramental
liturgy. The act of consecration includes certain proper and appropriate
moments - thanksgiving, anamnesis, Epiclesis. The deepest understanding
of the hallowing of the elements rejects any theory of consecration by
formula - whether by Words of Institution or Epiclesis.1 For the
Orthodox the culminating and decisive moment in the consecration is the Epiclesis.
- The unity of the members of the Church is renewed by the Spirit in
the eucharistic act. The Spirit comes not only upon the elements, but upon
the community. The Epiclesis is a double invocation: by the invocation
of the Spirit, the members of Christ are fed by his Body and Blood so that
they may grow in holiness and may be strong to manifest Christ to the world
and to do his work in the power of the Spirit. 'We hold this treasure in
earthen vessels.' The reception of the Holy Gifts calls for repentance
and obedience. Christ judges the sinful members of the Church. The time
is always at hand when judgement must begin at the household of God (2
Cor. 4.7; 1 Pet. 4.17).
- Although Epiclesis has a special meaning in the Eucharist,
we must not restrict the concept to the Eucharist alone. In every sacrament,
prayer and blessing the Church invokes the Holy Spirit and in all these
various ways calls upon him to sanctify the whole creation. The Church
is that Community which lives by continually invoking the Holy Spirit.
At their meeting in Thessaloniki in April 1977 the Orthodox members
asked that it should be pointed out that, in regard to the words in paragraph
30 of the Moscow Agreed Statement it is inexact to call the Epiclesis a
'formula' since the Orthodox Church does not regard it as such.
The Athens Report 1978
The Report of the special meeting of the Anglican-Orthodox Joint Doctrinal
Commission held in Athens in July 1978 included the following sections:
III The Orthodox position on the ordination of women to the
The Orthodox members of the Commission unanimously affirm the following:
(1) God created mankind in his image as male and female, establishing
a diversity of functions and gifts. These functions are complementary but,
as St Paul insists (1 Cor. 12), not all are interchangeable. In the life
of the Church, as in that of the family, God has assigned certain tasks
and forms of ministry specifically to the man, and others - different,
yet no less important - to the woman. There is every reason for Christians
to oppose current trends which make men and women interchangeable in their
functions and roles, and thus lead to the dehumanization of life.
(2) The Orthodox Church honours a woman, the Holy Virgin Mary, the Theotokos,
as the human person closest to God. In the Orthodox tradition women saints
are given such titles as megalomartys (great martyr) and isapostolos (equal
to the apostles). Thus it is clear that in no sense does the Orthodox Church
consider women to be intrinsically inferior in God's eyes. Men and women
are equal but different, and we need to recognize this diversity of gifts.
Both in discussion among themselves and in dialogue with other Christians,
the Orthodox recognize the duty of the Church to give women more opportunities
to use their specific charismata (gifts) for the benefit of the
whole people of God. Among the ministries (diakoniai) exercised
by women in the Church we note the following;
39 (i) ministries of a diaconal and philanthropic
kind, involving the pastoral care of the sick and needy, of refugees and
many others, and issuing in various forms of social responsibility.
(ii) ministries of prayer and intercession, of spiritual help and guidance,
particularly but not exclusively in connection with the monastic communities,
(iii) ministries connected with teaching and instruction, particularly
in the field of the Church's missionary activity,
(iv) ministries connected with the administration of the Church.
This list is not meant to be exhaustive. It indicates some of the areas
where we believe that women and men are called to work together in the
service of God's Kingdom, and where the many charismata of the
Holy Spirit may function freely and fruitfully in the building up of the
Church and society.
(3) But, while women exercise this diversity of ministries, it is not
possible for them to be admitted to the priesthood. The ordination of women
to the priesthood is an innovation, lacking any basis whatever in Holy
Tradition. The Orthodox Church takes very seriously the admonition of St
Paul, where the Apostle states with emphasis, repeating himself twice:
'But if we, or an angel from heaven, preaches to you anything else than
what we have preached to you, let him be anathema. As we have already said,
so I say to you now once more: if anyone preaches to you anything else
than what you have received, let him be anathema' (Gal. 1.8-9).
From the time of Christ and the apostles onwards, the Church has ordained
only men to the priesthood. Christians today are bound to remain faithful
to the example of our Lord, to the testimony of Scripture, and to the constant
and unvarying practice of the Church for two thousand years. In this constant
and unvarying practice we see revealed the will of God and the testimony
of the Holy Spirit, and we know that the Holy Spirit does not contradict
(4) Holy Tradition is not static, but living and creative. Tradition
is received by each succeeding generation in the same way, but in its own
situation, and thus it is verified and enriched by the renewed experience
that the People of God are continually gaining. On the basis of this renewed
experience, the Spirit teaches us to be always responsive to the needs
of the contemporary world. The Spirit does not bring us a new revelation,
but enables us to relive the truth revealed once for all in Jesus Christ,
and continuously present in the Church. It is important, therefore, to
distinguish between innovations and the creative continuity of Tradition.
We Orthodox see the ordination of women, not as part of this creative continuity,
but as a violation of the apostolic faith and order of the Church.
(5) The action of ordaining women to the priesthood involves not simply
a canonical point of Church discipline, but the basis of the Christian
faith as expressed in the Church's ministries. If the Anglicans continue
to ordain women to the priesthood, this will have a decisively negative
effect on the issue of the recognition of Anglican Orders. Those Orthodox
Churches which have partially or provisionally recognized Anglican Orders
did so on the ground that the Anglican Church has preserved the apostolic
succession; and the apostolic succession is not merely continuity in the
outward laying on of hands, but signifies continuity in apostolic faith
and spiritual life. By ordaining women, Anglicans would sever themselves
from this continuity, and so any existing acts of recognition by the Orthodox
would have to be reconsidered.
IV Anglican Positions on the Ordination of Women to the Priesthood
(1)The Anglican members of the Commission are unanimous in their desire
to accept and maintain the tradition of the gospel, to which the prophets
and apostles bear witness, and to be true to it in the life of the Church.
They are divided over the ways in which that tradition should respond to
the pressures of the world, over the extent to which the tradition may
develop and change, and over the criteria by which to determine what developments
within it are legitimate and appropriate. In the case of the ordination
of women differences have become particularly acute and divisive within
the Anglican Communion, now that the convictions of those in favour of
it have been translated into action in certain national churches.
(2) On this question there is a diversity of views in the Anglican Communion
and among the members of the Commission. There are those who believe that
the ordination of women to the priesthood and the episcopate is in no way
consonant with a true understanding of the Church's catholicity and apostolocity,
rather constitutes a grave deformation of the Church's traditional faith
and order. They therefore hope that under the guidance of the Holy Spirit,
this practice will come to cease in our churches.
There are others who believe that the actions already taken constitute
a proper extension and development of the Church's traditional ministry,
and a necessary and prophetic response to the changing circumstances in
which some churches are placed. They hope that in due time, under the guidance
of the Spirit, these actions will be universally accepted.
There are others who regret the way in which the present action has
been taken and believe that the time was not opportune nor the method appropriate
for such action, although they see no absolute objection to it. Some of
them hope that a way forward may be found which will allow for the distinct
and complementary contributions of men and women to the Church's ordained
The minutes of the 1978 Athens Conference add the following presentation
of Anglican views which were expressed at the time:
(1) Those Anglicans who in principle oppose the ordination of women
do so for the reasons advanced by the Orthodox in this report. They would
express their reasons as follows: the claim of the Anglican Communion to
be catholic means that compelling reasons must be demonstrated for the
Tightness of such a break with catholic tradition. Those who oppose such
a break believe that such reasons have not been forthcoming. On the contrary,
they believe that there are fundamental reasons why such a break should
not be made. These, in their judgement, come from a consideration of the
Person of Christ. Although there is neither maleness nor femaleness in
God, it was in a male that the Word was made flesh and humanity in all
its fullness was united to the Godhead. They believe that this fact expresses
the truth that the initiative in our redemption lies wholly with God, to
whom the response of humanity must be creative obedience. For a woman to
be the icon or sacramental expression of Christ as Head of the Church seems
to them to be in opposition to the biblical images of the Church in relation
to God, which consistently stress that humanity and the Church must be
feminine in relation to God. The New Testament indicates that the issue
of headship and
authority, however qualified, cannot be divorced either from the created
relationship between man and woman, for instance in marriage, or from the
instituted relationship between the ordained ministry and the congregation.
They believe that a male priest must be the symbol and image of Christ
as Bridegroom, whereas women, supremely exemplified in Mary, to whom was
given the highest vocation of any created being, must be the symbol and
image of the response of humanity in creative obedience. They believe that
the God-given nature of the ministerial priesthood includes the fact that
it is male. A refusal to accept this fact leads in their judgement, not
only to a distortion of man's understanding of his relationship to God,
but also to a distortion of his understanding of the redemption of the
deepest aspects of his humanity. Finally, the opponents believe that the
ordination of women to the priesthood is divisive because it is wrong,
rather than wrong because it is divisive.
(2) Those members of the Commission who advocate the ordination of women
to the priesthood now, do so because they believe that the Church's tradition
must grow and develop if the Church is to remain faithful to its mission
to the world. More particularly, they believe that this is a true development,
under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, of the patterns of ministry to which
God has been calling some Churches in response to major changes in the
ordering of society. The vocations of women who offer themselves for the
priestly ministry require therefore to be tested, and none of the arguments,
either from Scripture or tradition, advanced against such vocations seem
to those who hold this position to be in principle convincing. In particular
they hold that arguments which suggest that priests must be male in order
either to represent the maleness of God, a position held by no one in this
Commission, or because the maleness of Christ is of soteriological significance,
are based on serious doctrinal errors. Since priesthood represents humanity
to God and God to humanity, it is humanity and not maleness which is the
decisive qualification for exercising priesthood, just as in Christ, according
to catholic doctrine, it is his humanity which is of soteriological significance
and not the accidents of his humanity. Further they argue that to insist
on an all-male priesthood in societies which have abandoned all-male leadership
in other areas of life is in effect to distort the meaning of Christian
priesthood. This may lead to serious distortions in doctrine. Thirdly,
they believe that the ordination of women would lead to an enrichment of
the Christian priesthood by bringing to it women's gifts and wisdom, as
well as by deepening the Christian understanding of the divine saving initiative
in Jesus Christ which is represented by the priesthood.
(3) There are other members of the Commission who, while they find these
theological arguments valid and convincing, yet believe for reasons of
an ecclesiological nature that action in this matter should not be taken
Anglican-Orthodox Joint Doctrinal Commission
ANGLICAN PARTICIPANTS 1984
The Revd Canon A. M. Allchin Church of
The Revd Roger Beckwith Church of England
The Revd Colin Davey (Secretary) Church
The Revd Professor Eugene Fairweather Anglican
Church of Canada
The Revd Dr John Gaden Anglican Church
Mr Kiranga Gatimu Church of the Province
The Revd Professor W. B. Green The Episcopal
Church in the USA
The Rt Revd Richard Hanson Church of
The Rt Revd Henry Hill (Co-Chairman) Anglican
Church of Canada
The Revd Canon John McNab Church of the
Province of the West Indies
The Revd Dr William A. Norgren The Episcopal
Church in the USA
The Revd Professor Oliver O'Donovan Church
The Revd John Riches The Episcopal Church
The Rt Revd Richard Rutt Church of England
The Revd Dr John M. Sentamu Church of
The Rt Revd Dr Maxwell Thomas Anglican Church
The Revd Canon Hugh Wybrew Church of
Not Present at 1984 meeting
The Rt Revd Samir Kafity Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle
The Revd Luke Pato Church of the Province
of Southern Africa The Rt Revd Robert E. Terwilliger The
Episcopal Church in the U.SA
Other Anglican Participants 1977-83
The Right Revd R. A. K. Runcie 1977-8 (Co-Chairrnan) Church
The Revd Canon M. J. D. Carmichael 1977-81 The Church of the Province
of South Africa
The Rt Revd V. Cornish 1981 Anglican
Church of Australia
The Revd Canon Edward Every 1977-80 The Episcopal Church of
Jerusalem and the Middle East
The Revd Dr Edward Hardy 1977-80 The
Episcopal Church in the USA
The Rt Revd Mark Santer 1977-82 Church
The Rt Revd Graham Leonard 1977-80 Church of
The Revd Dr John Mbiti 1980-1 Church
of the Province of Kenya
The Rt Revd Graham Delbridge 1977-8 Anglican
Church of Australia
The Revd Dr Richard Morris 1977 The Episcopal
Church in the USA
The Rt Revd Jonathan Sherman 1977 The
Episcopal Church in the USA
Dr Paul Anderson 1977 The Episcopal Church
in the USA
The Revd John de Satge 1977 Church of
ORTHODOX PARTICIPANTS 1984
The Most Revd Archbishop Methodios of Thyateira and
Great Britain (Co-Chairman)
The Rt Revd Bishop Aristarchos of Zenoupolis
Patriarchate of Antioch
The Rt Revd Bishop Gabriel
Patriarchate of Jerusalem
The Most Revd Metropolitan Basil of Caesarea
Professor George Galitis
Patriarchate of Moscow
The Most Revd Archbishop Basil of Brussels and All Belgium
The Very Revd Professor Livery Voronov
Patriarchate of Romania
The Very Revd Archimandrite Nifon Mihaita
Patriarchate of Bulgaria
The Very Revd Professor Nikolay Chivarov
Church of Cyprus
The Most Revd Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Kition
Church of Greece
Professor Constantine Scouteris
Church of Poland
Mr Nikolaj Kozlowski
Church of Finland
The Rt Revd Bishop Kallistos of Diocleia
The Very Revd Dr George Dragas (Secretary)
Dr Andreas Tillyrides
The Very Revd Archimandrite Athanasios Theocharous
Not present at 1984 meeting
Patriarchate of Alexandria
The Most Revd Metropolitan Petros of Aksum
Patriarchate of Antioch
The Very Revd Archimandrite Gregory Saliby
Patriarchate of Serbia
Professor Stojan Gosevic
Patriarchate of Romania
Professor Nikolai Chitescu
Church of Greece
The Very Revd Professor John Romanides
Church of Finland
The Most Revd Metropolitan John of Helsinki
Other Orthodox Participants 1977-83
The Most Revd Archbishop Athenagoras of Thyateira and Great Britain
The Most Revd Archbishop Stylianos, Archbishop of Australia 1977-8
The Rt Revd Gregory of Tropaeou 1977-8 Patriarchate of Alexandria
The Most Revd Metropolitan Dionysios of Memphis 1981-2
Patriarchate of Moscow
The Most Revd Archbishop Vladimir of Dmitrov 1982
Patriarchate of Serbia
The Very Revd Professor G. Gardashevich 1981
Patriarchate of Romania
Mr Nicolae Mihaitza 1977
Deacon Dr Petru Y. David 1978
The Revd Silviu-Petre Pufulete 1980-1
Mr Nicholas Lossky 1977
The Very Revd Archimandrite Meletios 1977
The Rt Revd Bishop Timothy of Melitoupolis 1980-2
The Very Revd Archimandrite Symeon Lash 1982-3
List of Papers by Members of the Commission
AOJDD Title, author and details of publication
Meeting in Oxford 1973
37B Comprehensiveness and the Mission
of the Church The Revd A. M. Allchin
Published in Theology, vol. Ixxv, no. 630 (Dec. 1972) and in The
Kingdom of Love and Knowledge (Darton, Longman & Todd 1979).
43 The Thirty-Nine Articles
The Revd A. M. Allchin Published in Theology, vol. Ixxv, no. 630
52 Answers by Anglican
delegates to questions put to them by members of the Orthodox Commission
Published with AOJDD 43 in Theology, vol. Ixxv, no. 630 (Dec.
66 The Holy Spirit as
Interpreter of the Gospel and Giver of Life in
the Church today Metropolitan Stylianos of Miletoupolos.
67 The Atonement of Christ on
the Cross and in the Resurrection Archbishop Basil of Brussels and All
Meeting in Crete 1974
78 Inspiration and Revelation
in the Holy Scriptures Part I by the Revd R. Beckwith Part II by the Revd
80 Inspiration and Revelation
in the Holy Scriptures Professor N. Chitescu.
Published in Mitropolia Olteniei, Craiova-Romania, 1-3 (1978),
84 Revelation and Divine Inspiration
in the Holy Scriptures Professor George Galitis.
Meeting in Romania 1974
74 The Filioque Canon
76 The Councils, Icons and
Christology Canon E. Every.
77 Anglicans and the Decisions
of the Seventh Ecumenical Council Canon A. M. Allchin.
82 The Authority of the Ecumenical
Synods Metropolitan John of Helsinki.
87 Sources of
the Authority and Infallibility of the Oecumenical Councils
Archbishop Basil of Brussels and All Belgium.
Meeting in New York 1974
79 The Anglican Mind
on the Church as the Eucharistic Community Canon E. Every.
81 The Church as the Eucharistic
Society Archbishop Athenagoras of Thyateira and Great Britain.
90 Eucharist in the
Experience of the Orthodox Church Metropolitan Methodios of Aksum. Published
in Theological and Historical Studies, vol. 1
(1979), pp. 116-33.
Meeting in Truro 1975
98 Revelation in Scripture
Bishop R. P. C. Hanson.
102 The Sufficiency
of Scripture and the Canon of Scripture The Revd R. Beckwith.
103 The Via Negativa in
Western Mystical Theology: its relationship to
Palamism and its use of Holy Scripture The Rt Revd G. Leonard, Bishop of
104 The Place of Biblical Revelation and Religious Experience in
pastoral Work and Teaching The Revd C. Davey.
107 The Apophatic Foundations
of the Teaching about the Revelations of God in the Thought of the Eastern
Fathers Professor G. Galitis.
108 God Hidden and Revealed:
the Apophatic Way and the Essence-Energies Distinction Archimandrite Kallistos
Published in Eastern Churches Review VII, 2 (1975), pp. 125-36;
French translation in Messager de I'Exarchat du Patriarchal Russe en
Europe Occidentals, 89-90 (1975), pp. 45-59.
109 Revelation in the
Holy Scriptures Professor N. Chitescu Published in Glasul Bisericci, Bucharest,
3-4 (1978), pp. 274-89.
Meeting in St Albans 1975
99 The Clause in the Creed
concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit Canon E. Every.
105 Infallibility or Indefectibility? Archbishop Basil of
Brussels and All Belgium.
110 On the Unity of the Ecumenical
Councils The Revd Dr E. Hardy.
111 Infallibility or Indefectibilicy?
The Rt Revd R. Runcie, Bishop of St Albans.
113 The Seventh Council:
a further Note Canon A. M. Allchin.
114 Scripture and the
Councils The Revd M. Santer.
115 The Role of Icons
in the Light of the Seventh Ecumenical Council Metropolitan John of Helsinki.
116 The Filioque The
Revd Professor J. Romanides Published in Franks, Romans, Feudalism
and Doctrine and Interplay between Theology and Society (Holy Cross
Orthodox Press, Brooklyne, Mass., 1981), pp. 60-98.
117 Holy Scripture and
Councils Dr C. Scouteris Published in Sobornost 7:2 (1975), pp.
Meeting in London 1975
100 The Episcopate in relation
to Christian Unity Bishop J. G. Sherman.
101 The Epicletic Church
The Revd Dr R. Terwilliger.
106 The Holy Spirit and new
Forms of Unity The Revd Professor S. L. Greenslade.
122 Epiclesis of the
Holy Spirit Metropolitan Methodios of Aksum Published in Theological
and Historical Studies, vol. i (1979), pp. 134-9.
124 The Ordination of
Women Professor N. Chitescu.
128 The Ordination of Women
Professor N. Chitescu.
Meeting in Cambridge 1977
146 The Continuity of the
Church Bishop R. P. C. Hanson
148 The Church as the Bride
of Christ and under Judgement The Revd J. Riches.
149 The Bride of Christ Professor
157 The Problem of Intercommunion
from an Orthodox point of view Professor G. Galitis.
162 The Marks or Notes of the Church with special reference
to Article 19. The Revd R. Beckwith.
166 Church and Society The
Very Revd Professor N. Chivarov.
167 Church and the Churches
Professor N. Chitescu.
170 The Church and Churches
Professor G. Galitis.
154 Theotokos - Panaghia Dr
155 The Communion of Saints
and the Critical Examination of Theology and its Application The Revd Professor
156 The Blessed Dead in Anglican
Piety The Revd Dr E. Hardy.
164 The Filioque Clause
Dr P. Day.
168 The Theotokos - Panaghia:
some Anglican Reflections Canon A. M. Allchin.
169 The Communion of Saints
- Communio Sanctorum The Revd M. Santer.
163 Ecumenical Relations and
Ordination of Women to the Priesthood
in the Episcopal Church in the USA The Revd W. Norgren Published in Mid-Stream, vol.
xvi, no. 4 (Oct. 1977), p. 374.
174 Anglican-Roman Catholic
International Commission Agreed Statement on the Ordination and Ministry
(summary of paper by Metropolitan Methodios of Aksum).
Meeting in Athens 1978
185 The Case for the Ordination
of Women to the Priesthood The Revd J. Riches.
186 The Ordination of Women
from an Orthodox point of view Professor N. Chitescu.
189 The Christian Priesthood
- a Ministry for Men The Rt Revd R. Terwilliger.
190 Theological Considerations
on the Ordination of Women Archbishop Athenagoras of Thyateira and Great
191 The Filioque The
Revd Professor J. Romanides.
193A Man, Woman and the Priesthood of Christ.
Archimandrite Kallistos Ware. Published in P. Moore (ed.), Man, Woman
and Priesthood (London 1978), pp. 68-90.
193B Facing the Problem of the Ordination
of Women to the Priesthood.
Metropolitan Methodius of Aksum. Published in Ekklesiastikos Pharos, vol.
61 (1979), pp. 247-56.
Meeting in Llandaff 1980
207 Church and Eucharist,
Communion and Intercommunion. Archimandrite Kallistos Ware. Published in Sobornost, 7:7
(1978), pp. 550-67; reissued separately by Light and Life Publishing Company
210 The Church and the Churches
Bishop R. P. C. Hanson.
211 General Introduction to
'The Church and Churches' Professor N. Chitescu.
212 The Communion of Saints
212A The Communion of Saints in recent Welsh
212B The Prayers of the Saints All 212 by Canon
A. M. Allchin.
216 Death and the Communion
of Saints: Notes on Orthodox Teaching and Practice Archimandrite Kallistos
Ware Published in Sobornost, incorporating Eastern Churches
Review, 3:2(1981), pp. 179-91.
213 The Fitioque Clause in Ecumenical Perspective: a
preliminary Anglican Response The Revd Professor E. Fairweather
214 The Filioque in
Ecumenical Perspective 214A Supplementary to the Filioque Paper
All 214 by Archbishop Methodios of Thyateira and Great Britain.
215 A Statement by Archbishop
Methodios of Thyateira and Great Britain.
Meeting in Chambesy 1981
231 Anglican Understanding
of the Church The Revd C. Davey.
232 The Church Archimandrite
Kallistos Ware and the Revd R. Beckwith.
236 Church Relations
from a Practical point of view Protopresbyter G. Dragas
Published in Church and Theology, vol. 3 (1982), pp. 1127-32; ECNL, no.
15 (1982), pp. 42-6.
228 The Grace of the
Holy Trinity Bishop R. P. C. Hanson.
234 Participation in
the Grace of the Holy Trinity The Revd Professor J. Romanides Published,
with minor modifications, in 'Jesus Christ - the Life of the World', in Xenia
Ecumenica (Helsinki 1983), pp. 232-75.
235 Paradosis: some Reflections
on the Orthodox Understanding of Tradition Dr C. Scouteris. Published in Sobornost incorporating Eastern
Churches Reveiw, 4:1 (1982), pp. 30-7.
237 The Holy Tradition
and Customs in the Orthodox Church from the view point of Church Law Professor
Meeting in Canterbury 1982
256 The Apostolicity
of the Church Dr A. Tillyrides.
257 Witness and Service
in the New Testament Professor G. Galitis.
252 Participation in the Grace
of the Holy Trinity (continued from AOJDD 234) The Revd, Professor J. Romanides.
260 The Filioque Clause
in the Ecumenical Perspective The Very Revd Professor L. Voronov.
253 Orthodox Worship and the
Maintenance of the Faith Bishop Aristarchos of Zenoupolis.
254 Christian Holiness The
Revd P. Pufulete.
255 Christian Holiness Protopresbyter
Meeting in Odessa 1983
280 Further Steps
Towards Unity: Orthodox-Roman Catholic Dialogue
1972-1983 The Revd C. Davey.
281 Authority and Primacy with Reference to the ARCIC Final
Report The Revd J. Riches.
286 Evangelism Bishop
Aristarchos of Zenoupolis.
278 The Filioque Clause
Bishop R. P. C. Hanson.
282 Franks, Romans,
Feudalism, and Doctrine The Revd Professor J. Romanides.
283 On the Question
of the Filioque Professor V.V. Bolotov (translated by Canon H.
285 The Filioque Clause
in the Anglican Communion The Revd C. Davey.
304 Further Notes on
the Filioque Question The Revd Professor John Romanides.
305 The Question of
the Filioque from the Russian Perspective The Very Revd Professor
313 On the Theses of
Professor Bolotov The Very Revd Professor L. Voronov.
271 Anglican Iconography
Canon E. N. West.
276 Prayer The Revd Dr W.
277 Towards Christian
Asceticism The Revd Dr J. Gaden.
279 Family Devotion The Revd
Dr W. Norgren.
288 Prayer of the Mind The
Revd Dr G. Dragas Published in Mount Carmel, vol. 32 (1984), pp.
312 The Precious Icons Professor
C. Scouteris Published in Sobornost, incorporating Eastern
Churches Review, 6:1 (1983), pp. 6-18.