A response to Vatican doctrinal document

Published: Saturday, November 3, 2007

The recently published Vatican document "Response to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of Doctrines of the Church" has caused a firestorm of controversy.

The document declares that the one holy Catholic Church and Apostolic Church subsists or continues in the Roman Catholic Church alone. Pope Benedict XVI recognizes the sacraments and Apostolic succession of the Orthodox Church, but states the Orthodox churches "lack something in their condition as particular churches" because of their separation from Rome.

Commenting on the Vatican document, Bishop Hilarion of Vienna, the representative of the patriarchate of Moscow to the European Union said, "The Orthodox Church does not recognize the bishop of Rome as the 'pontifex maximus' of the universal church. In case of the restoration of the Eucharistic communion, the Orthodox Church will recognize the bishop of Rome as the first among equals (primus inter pares) in the family of primates of the local churches. The primacy of the bishop of Rome is, for the Orthodox, that of honor, not of jurisdiction."

The reason for the separation between our churches is historically based on how we understand the Doctrine of Authority of the Church.

The Roman Catholic Church understanding of the church can be defined as papal or institutional. Roman Catholics believe that Jesus Christ built his church on the person of St. Peter. Thus, Roman Catholics believe that all Christians owe obedience to his successor, the bishop of Rome. Roman Catholics consider the pope the vicar of Christ and supreme head of the church.

According to Roman Catholic doctrine then, those communities of Christians outside of communion with Rome are either defective, like the Orthodox or, like the Protestants, lack the attributes of a church.

The Orthodox Church cannot accept the papal or institutional concept of the church for many reasons. Orthodoxy strives to remain faithful to the beliefs and practices of the ancient undivided church.

As can be seen from a study of the decisions of the seven Ecumenical Councils, the bishop of Rome did not exercise anything close to the kind of power now claimed by the pope during this crucial period of church history.

In addition to defining the doctrine of the ancient undivided church, the councils adopted canons or rules, to regulate the administration of the church.

Canon VI of the First Ecumenical Council, Nicea I in 325 A.D., only granted the bishop of Rome authority over churches in the West and affirmed the independence of the churches of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem and Constantinople. Thus, instead of a centralized church built on the person of the pope, the canons of the Ecumenical Councils treat the church as a federation of independent, self-governing local churches.

The First Ecumenical Council also mandated that bishops should be elected locally, not appointed by the bishop of Rome, as in modern Roman Catholic practice, at least in America.

As described by the canons, the bishop of each province governed the affairs of the province, led by the chief bishop, or metropolitan, of the capital of the province. The metropolitans, however, did not have unlimited authority like the modern pope, but were required to submit to the authority of a council of all bishops of the province. The canons further stipulated that the council of bishops, now called a Holy Synod, must meet at least twice a year.

The Third Ecumenical Council, the Council of Ephesus, established a principle that when a local church reaches maturity, it should receive its independence and the right to govern its own affairs, by recognizing the independence of Cyprus in A.D. 431.

Eventually, the regional metropolitans became patriarchs, who presided over the churches of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem.

As outlined by the canons of the Ecumenical Councils, the bishop of Rome held a primacy of honor as the first among equals but had no actual authority outside of his own patriarchate.

Significantly, the Council of Chalcedon, the Fourth Ecumenical Council in A.D. 451, granted Constantinople equal status with Rome because of its status as the new capital of the empire.

Despite modern Roman Catholic teaching that ecumenical councils have no authority over the pope, the councils assumed authority over all bishops, including the bishop of Rome. The councils also knew nothing of papal infallibility.

The Sixth Ecumenical Council, the Third Council of Constantinople in A.D. 680, went so far as to declare Pope Honorius guilty of false teaching. Thus, modern Roman Catholic doctrine, which gives all power to the bishop of Rome, cannot be reconciled with the canons of the Ecumenical Councils in the view of the Orthodox Church.

The Rev. Daniel Rohan is the pastor at St. Mark Orthodox Church, Liberty.

SOURCE: