Page 203 - Orthodoxy Zizioulas

AU T O C E P H A LY A N D T H E U N I T Y O F O R T H O D O X Y
ebrated in every liturgy.
Canonically and historically, the role of the Ecumenical
Patriarchate of Constantinople is precisely to stand above all
nationalistic interests (the external conditions in which it cur-
rently exists, though in many ways unfortunate, are advanta-
geous in this respect) and to ensure that other Orthodox
Churches do the same. The experiences of the Orthodox
Churches in our century—particularly the efforts of the late
Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople to unite the auto-
cephalous Churches through a series of Pan-Orthodox con-
ferences starting in 1961—illustrate both the challenges and
the hopes that arise in this regard. The forthcoming Great
Council will reveal whether Orthodox ecclesiology will be the
decisive factor in relation to the canonical structure of Ortho-
doxy.
The second issue concerning the notion of autocephaly
relates to a misunderstanding that can easily arise regarding
its ecclesiological significance. If excessive importance is given
to this notion, it can easily lead to the conclusion that a par-
ticular autocephalous Church is expressed exclusively through
its head, as if it were inconceivable for certain bishops within
it to hold differing opinions on a given matter.
Such a misunderstanding of autocephaly would amount to
the error, already made by many, of equating the autocepha-
lous Church with the “local Church” in its ecclesiological
sense—that is, as the core of the Church’s structure. This would
represent a serious distortion of Orthodox ecclesiology. As
noted above, this core is to be found in the community gath-
ered around the bishop, whose responsibility within the
Church derives from being the head of the Eucharistic com-
munity and, thus, the image of Christ. In this role, every bish-
op has a rightful voice in matters of the Church ipso jure, not
203