This article is continued from Old Believer VI. In the
first part, Dr. Farrell showed that there were difficulties in viewing
the various Orthodox groupings as One or Holy.Catholic:
or The
From October 30th to
It is remarkable for its equivocal use of language. "All
Christians, women and men, must come into personal communion (koinonia,) with Christ, who shows no discrimination towards
us, for He is the Saviour of each and all in total
disregard of any humanly based discriminations."
There are at least two points here that must strike
the orthodox Anglican as disturbing. First the use of the word
"discrimination", which has been understood, at least in this
instance only in the adelpated sense that American
society understands it, as the unfair treatment of a person, racial group,
minority etc., or an action based upon such prejudice. But it can also mean the
ability to discern distinctions and differences. Thus, and secondly, the
statement that Our Lord is Saviour "in total disregard
of any humanly based discriminations" is manifestly docetic,
for it implies a disembodied salvation of an androgynous humanity which does
not exist.
That the
"Witnessing the tragic dehumanisation
which we often encounter in our contemporary society, the Orthodox are bound to affirm in the strongest possible way the dignity
of the human person, both the female and the male. Any act which denies the
dignity of the human person and any act which discriminates against women and
men on the basis of gender is a sin."
Here it is important to note not only the equivocation
but the fact that those acts which deny the dignity of the human person have
been left undefined. Conceivably, if enough like-minded people were in enough
positions of influence, one such act might in the future be understood to be
the denial of ordination to women. Consequently, the document does leave open,
at lest theoretically at this one point, a dangerous loophole. This is no idle speculation,
for in three devastating paragraphs the
"26. The Church should
re-examine potential data, views and actions which do not agree with her
unshakeable theological and ecclesiological principles, but have intruded from
outside and, being in fact perpetuated, may be interpreted as demeaning towards
women.
27. Moreover, the necessity for a specific
delimitation of roles in the Church should be emphasised,
especially in matters pertaining to ecclesiastical organisation.
The Orthodox underline spiritual authority rather than
temporal power. When we speak about authority in the
Church, we are in no way advocating a sort of bureaucratic
organisational clericalism, but rather we are emphasising a special charism in
the Church.
28. It follows that when we speak of roles in the
Church, we speak of special gifts, (charismata) of the Holy Spirit to be
received with gratitude, rather than what may be interpreted as administrative
'ranks' to be enforced by a hierarchical structure. We should here note the
importance of highlighting the pastoral dimension that is ours to address
issues raised by
And as if that were not enough, the statement
continues by taking note of the fact that there is "an increasing number
of women who are graduates of theology and other fields of advanced study in
certain Churches" ,
a situation which the Church is "called to consider constructively".
One such constructive response, the statement goes on to suggest, would be to
revive the apostolic order of deaconess.
This "revived order" will, it notes,
"not be solely restricted to a purely liturgical role or considered to be
a mere step on the way" to the priesthood. And all of this is to be guised
in a new language tailored and softened to facilitate dialogue "with our
non-Orthodox partners", whether "other Christians within the
ecumenical environment, non-Christians, atheists, or advocates of specific ideologies
and trends of thought".
Given this linguistic agenda, it is not surprising, therefore,
that the language of the King James Bible and liturgical English have to go, as
a careful reading of paragraph 39 implies: "The issues raised by the
feminist movement should be considered by us Orthodox with all reservations and
vigilance in their totality as well as in the particular aspects stated by
great feminist initiatives
such as the following(a) the use of inclusive language
which should not be taken lightly by us within concrete limits, (b) The
emphasis placed by feminists on the exegesis of
specific biblical texts especially in the Pauline writings"
Here, in a fashion approaching the degree of
"impaired communion" of the Eames
Commission's statement, the Rhodes conference has managed the metaphysically impossible
by appearing both to condemn and to accept "great feminist
initiatives" such as inclusive language and feminist "hermeneutics of
suspicion" regarding Saint Paul.
Catholic: or COCU, Eastern Style
One would think that the Affirmation of Saint Louis
would have sparked some ecumenical interest on the part of the Orthodox
Church in initiating dialogue with the Anglican Continuum in the hopes that the
promising theological basis of the Continuum would not be allowed to fall into
desuetude, and that the Orthodox Church might gain at least a practical basis
from which to consider the cultural problems it faces in being Orthodox in a
western context. Certainly practical considerations prevented both parties from
engaging each other at an official level.
But there are other reasons which perhaps hover in the
background, not the least of which is that to have done so might have proven to
be profoundly embarrassing for the modernist Orthodox jurisdictions which are
heavily involved in an ecumenical scheme to bring about the union of the
Orthodox and
The essence of the dialogue is that for fifteen
hundred years, the Copts and Orthodox have been victims respectively of mutual
misunderstanding. The Orthodox, who accept the definition of the Fourth
Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon that Christ is one
person in two natures, are not really Nestorians (as the Copts thought them to be),
nor are the Copts, who reject the Fourth Ecumenical Council and teach that
Christ is both one person and one nature really Monophysites
(as the
This presents the ecumenists in each camp with an almost
insurmountable difficulty. For the Copts, Severus of
Antioch is a saint, and commemorated as such in their liturgy. For the
Orthodox, Severus was excommunicated and a heretic.
The two problems, then, are what to do
with the Fourth (and by implication Fifth, Sixth and Seventh)
Ecumenical Council, and what to do with each others' saints.
The problem of the Council of Chalcedon
is neatly dispatched with the argument that the sole dispute was only over
words and terminology, an argument which the Orthodox often hear from the West
regarding the filioque:
(A distinction is to be made) "not only
between the doctrinal definitions and canonical legislations of a Council, but
also between the true intention of the dogmatic definition of a Council and the
particular terminology in which it is expressed, which latter has less
authority than its intention.
. . . the Church has always
the authority to clarify the decisions of a Council, in accordance with its
true intention
... Each council brings forth or emphasises
some special aspect of the one Truth, and should therefore be seen as stages on
the way to a fuller articulation of the truth."(1) Thus, it will be the "responsibility of the
Church Uniting as guardian of the apostolic Tradition ... as part of its
Therefore, it falls within the competence of this
"Church Uniting" to undo all those aspects of liturgical practice
which serve to distinguish the Coptic and
I have deliberately cited each of these documents out
of context and sequence in order to make the point that the assumptions and
methods underlying COCU and the Orthodox/Coptic dialogue are one and the same,
for without the benefit of the footnotes, to which ecumenical discussion group
would one assign each quotation? To COCU? To the WCC? Or even to an ecumenical
Apostolic:
Ecumenical Patriarch, Eastern Pope ?
Doubtless many traditionalist Roman Catholics and Orthodox
were dismayed by the recent appearance of the former Patriarch of
Constantinople, Demenios, in
For example. Patriarch Athenagoras,
widely hailed for his "lifting" of the anathemas against
Equally illuminating of the state of Orthodox ecclesiology
is the reply of the
Athenagoras. Metropolitan Pimen replied
that "we cannot avoid in connection with the ... assertion of Your Holiness'
letter, to declare again, clearly and categorically, that the primacy of honour, which... belongs to the Throne of Constantinople,
does not give her any basis for ... a position of power. In addition, we consider
that the centre of the internal unity of ... churches (is) to be found in Our
Lord Jesus Christ. We do not consider that the revered Throne of the Patriarch of
Indeed such was the position of the Ecumenical Patriarchs
themselves earlier in the century, when
That the Ecumenical Patriarchate has taken on such a tone
in recent decades is a symptom of the disorder that lies beneath the seemingly
calm surface of Orthodoxy, for in a dogmatic situation that grows increasingly
more chaotic, there are only two ways to restore order either by a restoration
of unity in truth, or by the imposition of authority.
A Personal Conclusion
The foregoing is a personal view of the situation of contemporary
Orthodoxy. It is incumbent upon me therefore to state explicitly that it is not
a view that one will readily encounter in the Orthodox Church. Indeed, outside
of traditionalist Orthodox jurisdictions one will be hard pressed to find it
stated from the point of view of the underlying assumptions and tactics of apostacy as I
With this in mind, I beg the reader's indulgence to
offer what is now strictly a personal view of the course of action which
Continuing Anglicans might consider. If one converts to Orthodoxy, be aware
that the picture the longer one is in it, and the more familiarly one studies
it, is hardly ideal. Orthodoxy in most cases is heavily involved in and
influenced by the modernist trends in the ecumenical movement. It is even less immune
to the effects_ of western Biblical Criticism
If one chooses to convert, therefore, do so, but do so
with eyes wide open, and fully convinced of the fundamental truth of Orthodoxy,
which will ultimately prevail by the grace of God. Be aware that one will
eventually be struggling with the same types of issues even in Orthodoxy. The sole
motivation for conversion to Orthodoxy should therefore be truth.
Merely to escape whatever one seeks to escape is not a sufficient basis for
If anything, conversion to Orthodoxy will sharpen, and
not diminish, one's perception of the serious state of all the churches and intensify
one's own personal efforts to live "against the
Equally, the Continuum cannot simply strive to
maintain the status quo of Anglicanism as it was before the Continuum came into
existence. l believe, and l believe profoundly, that
the ambiguities inherent in Anglicanism led ultimately to the crisis which gave
birth to the Continuum. I believe the Affirmation of Saint Louis was one
of the most timely documents to be produced by any church
in the twentieth century and I believe that it was so because in it a conscious
theological effort was made to resolve those and that the effort was largely successful.
And I believe the vision that the Affirmation offered
was one of a Western Orthodoxy. I would
A Continuing Anglican once asked me if it was not the clear
implication of the Affirmation that the filoque
was an amendment, alteration and suppression of the original faith of the
ancient undivided Church. I responded that of course this was an implication
But more importantly,
I pointed out that Anglican liturgical worship tends
quite often to be binitarian, and not Trinitarian,
which is one implication the Orthodox have always seen in the interpolation.
Reflect for a moment how often does one hear prayers concluded through Jesus
Christ our Lord, Amen"?
In point of fact, the phrase is a kind of liturgical shorthand.
I observed that all Orthodox prayer is always Trinitarian in form; each of the
Divine Persons is always mentioned in prayer. If the same rule were rigorously followed,
the collects would end "through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with Thee and
the Holy Ghost, ever one God, world without end. Amen", which is what the
liturgical "shorthand" is intended to communicate.
The Affirmation does contain within it the
ambiguity of supporting the interpolation by its authorisation
of the "Athanasian" Creed. The new
ambiguity facing the Continuum is therefore which type of Catholic
theology it ultimately endorses. Make no mistake, the two Tninitarian
doctrines, as doctrines, are mutually exclusive and not merely alternative
"models" of the
Classical Anglican formularies have always expressed the
genuinely Catholic nature of truth. Bishop Cosins gave
a preview of the Affirmation when he wrote "If theRoman
Catholics would make the essence of their Church (as we do ours) to consist in
these following points, we are at accord with them in the reception and believing
of . . . All the decrees of faith and doctrine set
This if acted upon as the Continuum establishes its seminaries
and curricula, as the rich witness of the Latin and Greek Catholic Fathers,
which Anglicanism did so much to promote, begins to work into the minds and hearts
of the Anglican clergy and faithful, will resolve of itself the issue of the filioque and other outstanding difference
between Anglicanism and Orthodoxy. This, I
And if I may offer one last observation, let no one belittle
what the Continuum has done, nor the tradition which it seeks to renew, as
many, I know, in the Orthodox Church tend to do. The fact that the Continuum
exists at all is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace-
it takes divine aid to combat the type of vicious institutional apostacy which overtook the Episcopal Church, and to break
formally with a beloved institution. Trust in that grace, that the Continuum's
very first theological formulation was sound it its motivation and the
direction it implies, and
References
1. WCC Does
2. COCU The COCU Consensus
3. WCC again. What are these others?
Return to Part One
