Pope Francis’ reference to himself as the ‘Bishop of Rome’
was music to the ears of Orthodox leaders for whom the question of papal
primacy has long been a problem for reunion.
When
Benedict XVI resigned, Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople
expressed more than surprise.
There was dismay that their “excellent
cooperation”, which had overseen the re-engagement of the Catholic and
Orthodox Churches in dialogue in 2007, after an impasse lasting seven
years, might not fulfil its promise because of a “brief papacy”.
The
Roman pontiff is still regarded as the first of the patriarchs by
Orthodoxy, even if Benedict dropped his title “Patriarch of the West” in
2006 as defunct, standing in the way of realistic ecumenism. So why
should a pope retire when urgent labours are in hand and their fruits
within reach? “With his wisdom and experience he could have provided
much more to the Church and the world.”
The Ecumenical Patriarch
is regarded as primus inter pares by many, but not all, of the world’s
Orthodox Churches. He is second only in the Universal Church to the
Bishop of Rome, but he is not an opposite number, having no immediate
jurisdiction beyond his small community in Turkey and parts of
north-east Greece, although his general responsibility for Orthodox in
diaspora affords him considerable influence. For wider leadership he
relies as much on persuasion, prestige and moral authority as canon law.
With painstaking plans for a Pan-Orthodox Council making progress, and
an abiding sense of affinity between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches
as both are dispersed alongside each other in every corner of the globe,
Bartholomew invested much hope in Benedict’s papacy for mutual support
and cooperation in the contemporary setting. Concerned for all Orthodox
in diaspora, the continued growth of Christianity in Europe and the very
survival of the Churches in their Eastern lands of origin, their joint
efforts at solidarity and even communion appeared at risk with the
prospect of a new leader.
Thus a statement from the patriarchate
explained Bartholomew’s decision to attend Pope Francis’ inauguration
personally: the need for “a profoundly bold step … that could have
lasting significance”. It is the first time the Bishop of Constantinople
has attended the inauguration of the Bishop of Rome ever, let alone
since the great schism of 1054. Yet the patriarch has already visited
Rome a number of times since Benedict’s visit to Istanbul in 2006. He
was the only ecumenical leader invited to make a speech at the
celebrations for the fiftieth anniversary of Vatican II and there have
been annual visits between Rome and Constantinople on the feasts of
their apostles for decades.
But this latest visit was different:
according to the patriarchate website: “after such a long division …
authentic reunion will require courage, leadership and humility. Given
Pope Francis’ well-documented work for social justice and his
insistence that globalisation is detrimental to the poor … the Orthodox
and the Roman Catholic traditions have a renewed opportunity to work
collectively on issues of mutual concern …
But such work requires a
first step and it would appear as though Ecumenical Patriarch
Bartholomew is willing to take such a step.” In one of those seemingly
informal but resonant gestures that we are beginning to expect from
Francis, the response was immediate and commensurate. The successor of
Peter greeted the successor of the other Galilean fisherman as “my
brother Andrew”.
Another dimension was revealed in a press
interview within hours of Pope Francis’ election by Patriarch Sviatoslav
Shevchuk, Major-Archbishop of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, by
far the largest of the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome, which
shares the same origins in Kiev as the Russian Orthodox Church, as well
as the same Byzantine rite and tradition as the Church of Constantinople
itself. He revealed that the young Fr Bergoglio frequently attended the
Divine Liturgy served by Fr Stepan Chmil, a mentor to him: “The Holy
Father knows not only of our Church, but also our liturgy, our rites,
and our spirituality.”
Furthermore, as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Jorge
Mario Bergoglio was ordinary for Eastern Catholics. In 2009, Sviatoslav
arrived as the auxiliary bishop for the Ukrainian Catholic eparchy in
Argentina and tells how his first steps in episcopal ministry were under
the cardinal’s watchful care. They have an even closer bond now,
because a year later Sviatoslav was called upon to succeed his revered
mentor Lubomyr Cardinal Husar, who retired like Benedict has done.
At
the age of 41, his election boldly charts a new course for the Ukrainian
Catholic Church in service of society and the unity of Churches at home
and abroad for decades to come. Pope Francis will be looking East to a
dynamic former protégé for inspiration as he charts his own new course.
Whether
it concerns a renewed partnership with the historic Eastern Catholic
Churches, or forging new bonds hopefully leading to communion with the
Orthodox, the model for Pope Francis’ understanding of the Christian
East, unlike his predecessors, is not European. They envisaged the
recomposition of the old Christendom around the reference points of the
Mediterranean.
But in world Christianity, Bergoglio has seen that the
East is now right across the West, just as the West has suffused the
lands of the East and is likewise worldwide. To talk of our respective
territories is, as Benedict realised, increasingly beside the point.
Anthony O’Mahony, director of the Centre for Eastern Christianity at
Heythrop College, London, estimates that there are now over four million
Eastern Christians, Catholic and Orthodox across Western Europe.
But
the weight of the diaspora seems to be shifting from Europe and North
America to the emerging powers in the global south, notably Australia
and Latin America. Here these old Churches are young and confident, able
to both sustain their tradition as they also become indigenous and
move beyond being simply ethnic chaplaincies. They can thus play strong
roles alongside others in the work of evangelisation, ecumenical
engagement and social development. This is what Pope Francis is used to
and how he will approach the inheritors of Byzantium across Europe too,
Catholic and Orthodox alike.
So, what of the Russian Orthodox
Church, the largest of all? Moscow regards itself as Third Rome and the
decisive player in the future of the Orthodox Church as a whole. It
believes an alliance with the Catholic Church in “the struggle for the
soul of Europe” is critical, but finds the universal primacy of the
Roman see difficult to contemplate. It sent to the inauguration its head
of external relations, Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, who did
his doctorate in the West at Oxford and is regarded as a likely
successor to Patriarch Kirill.
The message from Moscow present and
future was clear: Pope Francis was firmly addressed as “Primate of the
Roman Catholic Church” and as Kirill’s peer. Despite progress in
Orthodox-Catholic dialogue, which is seeking an agreed view on the Roman
primacy in the first millennium as a basis for recovering communion, it
feels out of place to the Russian Church, whose consciousness largely
relates to the second, during which it has grown considerably, with
little awareness of the need for a universal primacy.
Its present size,
resources and world diaspora mean that it is no longer local but a fact
of life to come to terms with, not just for the Catholic Church but for
other Orthodox jurisdictions too. Importantly, Russia’s activity in the
Middle East reanimates an imperial role as protector of all Orthodox.
Given that peace and stability for that region and its Christians will
loom as large for Francis as for Benedict, because they directly affect
the well-being of Europe, the significance of the Moscow patriarchate
has to be faced.
Pope Francis’ intention to trust and work with
the “local Church” resonates with many Orthodox. They have long been
looking for signs that the collegiality set forth at Vatican II will
turn into reality. They have noted how he has called himself not supreme
pontiff or Pope, but Bishop of Rome.
They will be looking to see how
the Primate of the Church, “presiding in love” at Rome, will treat the
Eastern Catholic Churches: as subsets of the global Roman Catholic
organisation, or as honoured Churches, firmly rooted in their local
homeland, yet now living side by side with Latin Catholicism’s own
diaspora in the emerging societies of the south and throughout the
world. It will reveal how the new Pope envisages the restoration of
communion between Catholics and Orthodox, since West and East must rely
on each other for the future. The Orthodox will be hoping that indeed
Pope Francis, Brother Peter to Brother Andrew, “knows our Church”.
*
Fr Mark Woodruff is a Westminster priest and vice chairman of the
Society of St John Chrysostom, which promotes Catholic- Orthodox
relations.