The theological landscape of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches’ dialogues has been profoundly shaped by the indelible mark of Metropolitan John Zizioulas. His influence on inter-church discussions wasn’t merely superficial; it was foundational, carving out pathways for mutual understanding and collaboration between the two Christian traditions.
For several centuries, spanning from the tumultuous Ferrara/Florence Synod in the mid-15th century, the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches had remained in a state of extended contention and animosity. Their historical differences, deeply embedded and complex, seemed to defy resolution. Yet, in an endeavor to bridge this chasm, representatives from both traditions convened on the Greek island of Rhodes in 1980. While this effort marked a significant step toward reconciliation, the contentious issue of Uniatism—pertaining to Eastern Churches coming under the aegis of the Pope while retaining their unique liturgical traditions—delayed the commencement of the formal bilateral dialogue until 1982 in Munich.
The involvement of Metropolitan John of Pergamon in the dialogue between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches showcases his commitment to promoting unity and understanding between these two major streams of Christianity. The rich theological legacy of Zizioulas is evident in how central his thought was to these dialogues. Zizioulas’ election as Metropolitan of Pergamon marked the beginning of his deep involvement in dialogues between the Orthodox Church and other Christian churches, especially the Roman Catholic Church. His leadership role as co-president of the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue highlights his central importance in these discussions.
Zizioulas is renowned for his ecclesiological thought, emphasizing the central role of the Eucharist, the significance of the bishop and synodical institutions, and the primacy of the local church as the embodiment of the Universal Church. These insights were deeply influential in the bilateral dialogues and are reflected in the key documents produced during the dialogues.
Since 1978, when the technical preparatory committee of this Theological Dialogue was established, Zizioulas’ involvement in its work has been active and essential. As a representative of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, he drew up the entire plan of the Theological Dialogue, its methodology, and thematic, based on which this great Theological Dialogue has been held ever since. Member of the Coordinating “Committee” and the second sub-committee of the Dialogue, Zizioulas drafted the initial drafts of the common theological texts, which were discussed and approved by the plenary of the “Committee”, and which include: (a) The Mystery of the Church in Light of the Mystery of the Holy Trinity (= “Munich Text”); (b) Faith and the Mysteries (= “Text of Crete”), and (c) Ordination and apostolic teaching (= “Text of Bari”). These texts, which were discussed and evaluated internationally, were the first important steps toward rapprochement between the two Churches.
The documents produced during the dialogues—notably Munich 1982, Bari 1987, New Valaamo 1988, and Ravenna 2007—have been instrumental in fostering a deeper mutual understanding and rapprochement between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches. The emphasis on a common interpretation and understanding of ecclesiological tradition played a crucial role in this process.
The Munich dialogue stands out as a testament to the enduring influence of Metropolitan John Zizioulas. From the inception of these discussions, Zizioulas emerged as an instrumental figure, representing the Orthodox standpoint in the Joint Committee. His contributions went beyond mere participation: he meticulously shaped the dialogue’s foundational principles, its methodological approach, and even its overarching agenda.
The period between 1980 and 2000, often regarded as the dialogue’s inaugural phase, witnessed Zizioulas’s intensive involvement in drafting seminal theological documents. Notably, the agreements reached in Munich (1982), Bari (1987), and New Valamo (1988) bear his distinctive imprint. These documents, rooted in a shared understanding of the Church’s eucharistic nature and a mutual interpretation of the Church’s unbroken tradition from the first millennium, paved the way for deeper mutual comprehension between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.
The Filioque controversy revolves around the Western addition of the phrase “and the Son” to the Nicene Creed, specifically regarding the procession of the Holy Spirit. Zizioulas approached this long-standing theological dispute by appealing to shared patristic sources and conciliar tradition. By drawing from common theological wellsprings, like the teachings of Maximus the Confessor and the decrees of the Second Ecumenical Council, Zizioulas aimed to forge a path towards understanding and reconciliation.
In essence, Zizioulas’s theological expertise catalyzed the reconnection of these two “Sister Churches.” Through his efforts, centuries of division began to give way to a renewed spirit of ecumenical cooperation and understanding.
The early successes of the dialogue between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches, buoyed by the theological and diplomatic prowess of Metropolitan John Zizioulas, soon encountered challenges. After a vibrant period of ecumenical discussions during the 1980s and early 1990s, the dynamic shifted. The political upheavals in Central and Eastern Europe, particularly the collapse of communism during 1989-1990, brought unforeseen complexities to the table. Uniatism, or the union of some Eastern Christian Churches with the Roman Catholic Church while maintaining their liturgical distinctiveness, became a contentious focal point. This contentious issue seemed to serve as a convenient excuse, stalling the dialogue—a situation foreshadowed by the Balamand Document of 1993.
For more than a decade, the dialogue lay dormant, encapsulated in a diplomatic stalemate. Yet, hope resurfaced in 2006, marking the onset of the dialogue’s second phase. Zizioulas, now stepping into the role of co-president of the Joint Committee, collaborated with Cardinals Walter Kasper and, later on, Kurt Koch. Although this revived engagement did not achieve the same prolific results as its earlier counterpart, it wasn’t entirely without fruit.
A landmark of this period was the Ravenna Document, unveiled in 2007. This intricate text delved into the intricate connections between the sacramental nature of the Church and its resulting ecclesiological and canonical consequences. True to form, Zizioulas’s signature theological stance, centered on eucharistic ecclesiology, permeated the document. The Ravenna Document advanced a nuanced understanding of the Church’s threefold (regional, local, universal) realization of conciliarity and primacy. This was framed within the context of the foundational beliefs of the early Church, drawing upon the eucharistic ecclesiology as a lens to discern the Church’s inherent nature.
The structure of the Church mirrors the Trinitarian order (taxis) of personal relationships and it is transferred through the Eucharistic channel into the structure of the Church. Drawing inspiration from Apostolic Canon 34 and Trinitarian theology, Zizioulas emphasizes the significance of primacy at both local and universal levels. This primacy, set within the framework of conciliarity, offers a solution to the longstanding debate on papal primacy, a contentious point between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Church.
However, as with any major theological endeavor, the Ravenna Document was not without its critics. It sparked vigorous intra-Orthodox discussions, underscoring the complexities of reconciling centuries-old theological divides. Through it all, Zizioulas’s contributions stood as a testament to the enduring hope for unity amidst a landscape of religious diversity.
Metropolitan John Zizioulas’s ecclesiological contributions played a pivotal role in bridging the theological divide between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. His influence is discernible in the series of dialogues and documents, from the Munich Document to the later Ravenna Document of 2007.
Central to Zizioulas’s theology was his emphasis on the Eucharist as the very core of the Church. He accentuated its role in defining the Church’s existence and unity. Additionally, he underscored the significance of the bishop’s role and the synodical structure, critical for shaping the Church at various scales: local, regional, and universal. Zizioulas’ deep conviction was that locality was pivotal; it’s through these local manifestations that the universal church revealed itself throughout history. Moreover, his thoughtful and considered approach to the contentious issue of primacy offered avenues for mutual understanding and collaboration between the two traditions.
While the Ravenna Document was a testament to the strides taken towards bridging divides, it wasn’t without controversy. Its release instigated significant debate within the Orthodox representatives, leading the dialogue into unfamiliar territory. Despite the remarkable progress symbolized by the unanimous endorsement of the Chieti Document in 2016, the undercurrents of unease remained.
It was this complex landscape, marked by significant advancements juxtaposed with intra-Orthodox tensions, that eventually led Zizioulas to step down from the presidency of the Joint Committee in 2015. As reports suggest, Zizioulas’s profound theological authority, while being a beacon for many, also evoked disquiet and subtle resistance among certain Orthodox representatives. His visionary stance, while pushing the boundaries of the dialogue, also highlighted the inherent challenges of such theological reconciliations.
About the Ravenna Document Zizioulas said:
“The first tangible result of theological discussions between East and West on this subject, and especially in the context of the official Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic and the Orthodox Churches , was undoubtedly the Ravenna Document of 2007 that dealt with the ‘Ecclesiological and Canonical Consequences of the Sacramental Nature of the Church: Ecclesial Communion, Conciliarity, and Authority.’ It was in this document that Roman Catholics and Orthodox expressed for the first time agreement on a fundamental ecclesiological thesis: ‘Primacy at the different levels of the life of the Church, local, regional and universal, must always be considered in the context of conciliarity.’ The importance of this common agreement lies, first, in the fact that both Roman Catholics and Orthodox agreed that primacy is linked inseparably with synodality and cannot be exercised outside it; and, second, in the joint agreement by both sides that there is no synodality without primacy at all levels: local, regional, and universal.”
According to Zizioulas, there is a reason to consider the Ravenna Document a historic document:
“In my opinion, these two points render the Ravenna Document a historic document, opening the way to a rapprochement between the two great traditions of West and East on an issue that has bitterly divided them for centuries. With this agreement, Roman Catholics embrace the concept of primacy as understood from the Orthodox perspective, while the Orthodox accept the concept of a universal primus, albeit always understood within the synodal structure. If these agreed principles are officially accepted and applied, a major obstacle to the restoration of full communion between the two Churches will be removed.”
Metropolitan John Zizioulas’ theology and active participation in the dialogues have been instrumental in bridging the gaps between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches. His emphasis on Eucharistic ecclesiology and his nuanced approach to contentious theological issues underscore the potential for rapprochement and deeper mutual understanding between these two ancient Christian traditions.
